Let's Talk About Sex

[rockmongrel]

Maturity please.

Sex is awesome.

[SSY]

Maturity please.
<img src='/images/emoticons/smiley2.png'>

[rockmongrel]

If you have nothing positive to contribute to a general discussion thread, please don't post.

[HeavyDDR]

So you stick the penis in the vagina?

Oh... Whoops...

[Face]

My 9th grade bio teacher once exclaimed to us... "SEX... FEELS.... GOOD!!!!"

I tend to agree.

[rockmongrel]

Frankly, the other way round is too difficult.

[JesusRocks]

I've never had it and I have been saving myself... 16 years out of necessity (couldn't get any)... aand from then til present, out of choice.
Yeah, too tired to post anything like... informative... but this is still serious...

I had better not get loads of reply comments saying some rubbish about sex being "sinful" ಠ_ಠ

[MrsSallyBakura]

Sex isn't a sin, it's just a big responsibility, which is why it's wise to stay celibate until marriage. I have yet to meet a couple who wasn't at least engaged before they had sex that lasted longer than a year after they had it.
Besides, it lowers the number of people you've had sex with down, therefore lowering the chance of you getting an STD. It's just practical, really, even if it's really hard sometimes. But it's probably worth it.

[Tatterdemalion]

Humans are sexual creatures. That is, it is in our nature to have sex, to want sex, and to seek out sex. It's not even a choice...that is, whether or not to actually engage in sexual activity is a choice, but sexual desire of some sort is innate in most people.

And as far as the notion of remaining celibate until marriage, I think that's a bit silly, if not highly impractical. Because why do people get married? In the old days it was indeed, for the most part, a business transaction (the farmer would marry his daughter to another farer's son, and would get X amound of cattle and Y pieces of silver in return), but in the modern world, I'd assume that people marry because they love each other, and intend to have a lifelong romantic relationship, grow old together, and all that good stuff (correct me if I'm wrong).

So if we accept that marriage is a serious, lifelong commitment, then remaining celibate until marriage just isn't practical. I'd been said that sex is a big responsibility, but I think marriage is a much bigger responsibility.

Granted, I'm not saying that everyone should be as promiscuous as possible and have sex with everything they see, in fact far from it. I'm just saying that I think it's possible to have a meaningful, healthy, sexual/emotional relationship with someone, without the relationship being as intense, long-term or significant as marriage. And I think that once something such as the prospect of sex is no longer an incentive for marriage, marriage becomes more significant and meaningful in its own right.

Also, on the overall subject of sex, I think Freud put it best when he said "Everyone loves sex, and we're obsessed with sex, and kids are little sexpots, and we're all going to have sex, and the world is full of sex, so everybody should have sex"

By the way, that's translated from German, so it may have lost some of its original poetic value.

[frogger4Christ]

It's only for marriage! It's not before the marriage! It seals marriage! It is the marriage!

[GcarOatmealRaisinCookies]

Would guys look twice at a girl if she didn't behave sexually?
I have dated a lot of losers, they only wanted one thing, if they didn't get it they left.
Ironically those guys were all older than me, too. one jerk ditched me because so idiot was spreading lies about me and he believed them. I am convinced my child was the product of rape. I was saying 'no' and he kept going. I won't press charges because I stayed with the guy. I admit fully that it was a stupid mistake, and my error completely.
It's hard for me to date, guys don't notice me. In real life I am short and stocky. There is some bitterness, as well as the fact that I have a mental illness. Guys see me as damaged and don't want me, IMO.

[Yuikiko]

Abstinence programs, even though they claim to prevent teen pregnancy and STD's, do not really work well, because they scare kids out of sex to the point where they are afraid to use protection, and then end up doing it without it..

Even though saving sex before marriage is a good way to protect yourself, you can still get STD's from your wife/husband. The important thing is, if you are going to have sex not for children, then use protection and/or birth control pills. If you do want kids, get each other checked by a doctor. And more importantly, make sure the person that is going to stick their manstick into you (or where you will stick your manstick into) loves you as well as you do. (Because no one wants an unwanted child).

[l3o2828]

I is horny :P
BTW thank you Jesus .. that messages made me feel a little alright :)

[Chidori]

stick their manstick into you
Manstick eh, what are you 5? Call it a penis for crying out loudI is horny :P.... thank you Jesus
Awesome, i never though I would ever see those two things together in one post.

[killshot]

Would guys look twice at a girl if she didn't behave sexually?
Is this what you really think of us? You say that you dated a lot of losers, but then again you did pick them. I'm sorry to be so insensitive, but I find this to be a recurring pattern in a lot of women. They say that they want someone funny and compassionate, but at the end of the day the only guys getting laid are the assholes. Just once I would like to see a girl admit that she likes to be ingored, verbally abused, and used like a sex object. I'm not talking about all women here, but there are quite a few who fit this description.

[GcarOatmealRaisinCookies]

I also mentioned that I was bitter, too. I've been through hell, naturally I am angry.
What happens when the guy doesn't take no for an answer?

[MrsSallyBakura]

You make some good points. But shouldn't sex and marriage be interrelated? Now I know what you're saying when you say:
And I think that once something such as the prospect of sex is no longer an incentive for marriage, marriage becomes more significant and meaningful in its own right.
but there will come a time during that marriage when sex just becomes a normal part of life.
So if we accept that marriage is a serious, lifelong commitment, then remaining celibate until marriage just isn't practical.
How is it not practical? I don't understand where you're coming from with this statement.

I guess my point is that marriage solidifies your relationship with the person you love. Sex, if both parties consent, is something that attaches you very, very much to your partner physically, emotionally, psychologically, etc. If you have that attachment before your relationship is solidified, it could lead to a messy break-up. Not always, but usually. I've seen it, and it's sad, and that's an understatement.
Even though saving sex before marriage is a good way to protect yourself, you can still get STD's from your wife/husband.
True, but that also depends on how many sexual partners your wife/husband had before you. My Biology professor said that you have sex with everyone your partner had sex with previously. If you both marry as virgins by the time you're about 20 or older then it's highly unlikely for you to get one. Isn't there a correlation between the rise of STDs and the "Free Love Movement?"

[AllisonWalker]

I'm with Mrs.SallyBakura, sex isn't an activity I do when I'm bored, its special and I'm only planning on sharing it with that special person. I don't want STD's and I don't want kids (at least, not right now) and protection doesn't always work 100%. Besides, sex complicates things. No thanks. I'll stay a virgin until I'm married, thank you.

[araharu]

My only problem with the "no sex until marriage" sentiment is that it makes sex seem like a dirty or bad thing. I know for my part, my parents pushed this sentiment for me, and by the time I got a girlfriend and we were ready to get physical, I was scared. I was scared for really no good reason other than I felt that what I was thinking about or participating in was inherently "bad" or "sinful." After I did have my first sexual experience, I realized that was foolish on my part. It only promoted fear and a self-loathing for going with my natural desires.

HOWEVER, I can also see the other side of the argument, because long after I had lost interest in this girl, I was still going out with her (and I think the same on her part as well) solely because of the physical attraction. So while I don't think sex should be portrayed as evil (because that's just not healthy), I also don't think that sex should be the defining portion of any relationship, as is the trend with many kids my age.

[GcarOatmealRaisinCookies]

Precisely,
Sex is between two consenting adults. That really care about eachother.
However, Sex is not the basis of the relationship.
It's normal to want to have sex.
Rape on the other hand is considered a violent Physically painful thing, however in my case, I was confused about whether it was rape because THERE WAS NO PHYSICAL PAIN. I was expecting a Rape to hurt physically, but I was raped it didn't hurt, so I didn't think I was raped until well after my child was born and I dumped my EX for other personality conflicts. See my short story "Love at first sight" in my Blog.

[MrsSallyBakura]

My only problem with the "no sex until marriage" sentiment is that it makes sex seem like a dirty or bad thing.
This goes for your entire post, but I know exactly what you mean. That's why when you teach kids and teenagers that sex should be saved for marriage, you should stress that it's not because it's dirty, it's because it's special and should be saved for that one special person. Also stress that it's ok for you to desire sex as long as you have self-control and you're willing to love the other person more than you love your desires.
It should also be stressed that if you do end up making mistakes, it's not the end of the world. It doesn't mean you're a bad person. You can always start over. Even if you're no longer a virgin, it doesn't mean that you'll always be a dirty slut or anything like that. It's not easy to start over, it's not easy to learn from your mistakes sometimes, but I know people who have and it's simply amazing to look back at how they were before they decided to change their lifestyle. Simply amazing.

I'll keep this as vague and anonymous as possible, but I know a guy and girl who during their sophomore year got into a relationship and they were very physical. He always bragged about what she would let him do to her. He was an ass and she was a snob. After they finally broke it off permanently, both of them had their own air to breathe and under some personal circumstances decided to change their lifestyles and by the end of their senior year they were on good terms again (though not dating).
HOWEVER, I can also see the other side of the argument, because long after I had lost interest in this girl, I was still going out with her (and I think the same on her part as well) solely because of the physical attraction.
I hear that story a lot from the kind of books I was recommended about sexual purity and whatnot. It's really nice to read it from someone's personal experience. Thank you.

[Yuikiko]

Thats why it is more important that you love each other even without sex, before having it. Otherwise it'll end up in the situation where the guy got the girl pregnant either ends up running away into Mexico or is married to her through a shotgun wedding.

[MrsSallyBakura]

Which is exactly my point. :)

Marriage just solidifies that love. Makes it harder to just walk out on.

[PhillyEagles4Life]

My only problem with the "no sex until marriage" sentiment is that it makes sex seem like a dirty or bad thing.
The only people really that follow that belief are religious people, according to the bible it is a sin to have sex before marriage because sex is supposed to take place between two adults that love each other, it's a bond of love if you will. I am a christian and fully believe in that.

[Titan50]

Interesting fact:
5 kids out of my class of 14-15's are non-virgins
OH SHI-

[RedRook]

Isn't there a correlation between the rise of STDs and the "Free Love Movement?"
No actually. in the 1800's Syphilis was a huge problem, and pretty much as far back as human history STD's exited and have thrived. Humans inherently have sex. Thats what we do. There really was no time of celibacy in the human history, sex is just something people have always done in vast quantities and without end, this generation isn't special in that regard. after I had lost interest in this girl, I was still going out with her (and I think the same on her part as well) solely because of the physical attraction.
This brings up a good point that I feel needs to be discussed in society in general, but has often been avoided for a more 'romantic' view of sex. Sex and Love have no correlation. Just like Love and Hatred are not opposite emotions. I know I have both loved and hated someone at the same time and you can have sex with someone without even liking them. Sex and Love are two entirely different things but I think people have no idea what 'love' really is. I may not be an expert or anything, but I think everyone thinks Love has something to do with attraction to another person, and that drawl is what makes you love them, no. Thats is what makes you attracted to them. What makes you love someone is trust (as corny as that may sound). Love has very little to do with attraction in my opinion. Love is almost entirely about trust. Once you trust someone with every facet of yourself, or at least most of it, that is love. When you feel comfortable with someone despite each others rampant human flaws and misgivings, and even your evils, then you love them, but sexual attraction will 9 times out of 10 obscure your true feelings about a person, which is why it's important to know sex.

I think it's way more than important to be comfortable with your sexuality. I know I am not, which is why I feel this way. Being sexual and accepting your attractions and emotions for what they are, instead of using them as a blinding excuse for love, is important. It's not a good idea to have lots of sex with tons of different people obviously, but having some sex with some people isn't as harmful as everyones parents and churches want you to believe. It's also important to know the line between liking someone, wanting to have sex with someone, and loving someone. Wanting to have sex with someone is fine if you feel comfortable enough to tell them that and take precautions. Liking someone is great too, but you have to know the difference between like and love. I've liked a lot of women, Hell I've liked over half the women I've ever known (of course which guy really hasn't?) but I have yet to really love one. Love isn't really a once in a lifetime thing, or something your built for one person in the world for and all that. love is just something you rarely find and often times exploit. Being yourself, and I mean you, you, not who you think you are or who you want to be, is very rare in our world. Finding someone to put up with your dumb ass is even rarer.

Anyway as you may have noticed I left out marriage so far. There is a reason for that. marriage has nothing to do with any of what I've written. I have no idea why it's always seen as some sort of natural ending point to love and sex, but really marriage is a thing all by itself. It is a legal institution set up by respective forms of governments. Marriage didn't even exist way back when the bibles were written and all that, you just found someone and stuck around them to keep each other afloat and sometimes out of necessity or desperation. Marriage was just some sort of weird creation of bureaucracy for various reasons. Marriage is just something we're told is the natural end point of a relationship, when really it's just some random thing people threw together. If you think about it, marriage doesn't make a lot of sense outside of simply wanting to be with someone you like and trust and help support each other. Outside of that it's just a bunch of legal mumbo jumbo without much meaning.

Anyways, all this is just my opinion, which I am sure no one will agree with.

[MrsSallyBakura]

I agree with a lot of it, actually. Love is trust in someone, love is not a feeling of highs and butterflies that you have every single time you're with the person. Sometimes when I'm with my boyfriend I don't have that feeling and that's ok. We just like to hang out together as friends too; not everything we do has to be romantic, we can just be friends as well.

Marriage isn't the end of anything either; it's a completely new beginning. Marriage didn't just start out as legal stuff either, so back in the Bible days it wasn't exactly what we think of marriage today either. In the English translations of the Bible they use the terms husband and wife even back in Genesis, but like I said they probably had a bit of a different meaning, but they were still "married" I guess. I think it later turned into a more ceremonial thing in the Judeo-Christian tradition, I don't really know when, and then during the early days of the Catholic church took the pagan tradition of wedding rings and integrated them with Christian matrimony. It later became just a bunch of legal stuff later in history when the law was Christian and people were called Christian but they didn't act that way, and then church and state separated more and more and now under the law without much of its original Christian meaning while churches still make it more spiritual and significant.

That's just how my mind processed this history; feel free to correct me if I'm wrong about something.
according to the bible it is a sin to have sex before marriage because sex is supposed to take place between two adults that love each other, it's a bond of love if you will.
Actually the Bible speaks against "fornication," which is a fancy word for premarital sex. I'd give you some passages but I can't think of any right off the top of my head and I don't have a Bible on me... and I have to be in class in 5 minutes. :P

[PhillyEagles4Life]

Actually the Bible speaks against "fornication," which is a fancy word for premarital sex. I'd give you some passages but I can't think of any right off the top of my head and I don't have a Bible on me... and I have to be in class in 5 minutes. :P
Yeah. when I posted that, I didn't have one on me either, I was typing that using what I could remember, otherwise I would of done the same thing (post some passages).

[JesusRocks]

I guess if parents press the no sex before marriage thing into you too much, then sex would feel like a dirty or bad thing... however I personally made this descision out of choice... this choice was pivoted on a respect for sex, it's an intimate act between two people, pretty much one of the most intimate of things that a couple can do... How special it is in the mind of a person can depend on the bond that that person has with his/her partner... if it's a weak relationship, it might seem throwaway and superficial... if it's a strong relationship, it might seem like the pinnacle of intimacy...

Now, when two people make their vows to each other in marriage, that's a special moment... it's a moment where they are (in theory) no longer able to back out of their relationship if something is not to their liking... it's a commitment, the couple vow to be together until death parts them... that is why, firstly, the person you are going to marry, must be chosen very carefully, the relationship worked on and built up over time before making the commitment...

some people have said that the type of commitment that marriage is, is an unfair one because you might be stuck with someone you'll lose interest in or he/she might turn out to be a psychopath... However, this would be where careful, thorough, thoughtful choices must be made instead of quick, spur of the moment ones based on inexperience... Love is about much more than your "interest" in your partner...

It's a huge decision, and both parties go through it together. Saving one of the most intimate acts for after this monumentous decision simply makes sense to me... why throw it away in a relationship that is not bound by such a bi-lateral covenant, which therefore has absolutely no assurance of tenure?
(basically there is no agreement or assurance that the relationship will last... marriage at least puts the length of time it will last for as being until the death of one of the parties, or where there is adultery)

Of course marriage may not last... and quite a few don't... and the number unfortunately is quite high... but at least there is something there that both parties have agreed upon... it takes trust that neither party will forsake the vows, but hopefully that trusting and loving relationship has been built up, without the requirement (and possible stumbling block) of sexual activity, over time, prior to making the vows...


(BTW: my dad, being.. well.. a dad.. actually promoted and encouraged pre-marital sex by buying contraceptives and giving over the feeling that he would be "proud" if I had had sex... in a "that's m'boy" kinda way, parental force in either direction is dangerous and can lead to a rejection of those values in favour of the opposite. However, one of these opposites is dangerous, and the other is slightly more sensible in my opinion... )

[Tatterdemalion]

Well, I'm finally replying to you, I hope it's not too late. To answer your question simply, no, I don't think sex and marriage should be related.

See, the way you're talking you make it sound as though marriage is just a part of life. What you're suggesting, it seems, is that at some point in everyone's life a love happens, and as a result two people marry and spend the rest of their lives in a loving relationship, etc., etc.

Now, call me Mr. Nontraditionalist if you like, but I don't happen to share your world view. As I see it, love is sporadic and unforseeable. It's not something you can create, it's not something you can summon, and it's not something you can assign to a certain time period in your life.

I myself don't expect to get married at any point in my life. That is not to say that I don't believe I'll ever marry someone, but I don't expect to be married. In fact, the only time I would ever even possibly consider something akin to marriage would be after I've met someone I'd actually want to marry. Because that's the only time you can actually make such a judgement, right?

What it seems is that anticipating marriage to the extent that you'll actually plan your sex life around it is kind of like making a reservation at a restaurant for yourself and someone who you've never actually met. It's a plan for something that you really have no way of anticipating, yet which you're going to use to plan your entire lifestyle.

Perhaps this "no sex until mariage" concept held some water back when marriages were, you know, arranged, but in the world of today it's a shaky investment to say the least.




Also, I'd just like to comment on something else you said, about how marriage didn't start out as just legal stuff, but that its nature as a legal contract is a modern construct...I'm sorry, but if I remember my history correctly (which I think I do), it's the other way around. Marriage has always been a legal ceremony, and it is perhaps less contract-oriented now than at any other time in history. First off, keep in mind that traditional marriage, from almost any part of the globe, originates from very mysogynistic cultures. So, the fact that in many senses men literally owned their wives, also keep in mind that women had virtually no choice in who they married...because it was a business arrangement. Marriage has throughout history been a system through which families have established exchange of goods, property, and people. In the modern world, to the contrary, marriage is almost the opposite, in the sense that women can marry whoever they want, and that people do not bring property into the marrage so much as they amass their own property after the marriage...and the families aren't effected in the same way.

So marriage in the modern world is really as liberal as ever, and has less legal and economic implications.






Also, just a comment on the whole thing with the safety from STD's if two people marry as virgins...keep in mind that if either spouse has an affair, they can contract an STD and transmit it to their partner...the real way to significantly reduce the risk of contracting an STD is to practice safe sex. Always. Even if you're married.




Okay, I'm done.

[MrsSallyBakura]

See, the way you're talking you make it sound as though marriage is just a part of life. What you're suggesting, it seems, is that at some point in everyone's life a love happens, and as a result two people marry and spend the rest of their lives in a loving relationship, etc., etc.

Now, call me Mr. Nontraditionalist if you like, but I don't happen to share your world view. As I see it, love is sporadic and unforseeable. It's not something you can create, it's not something you can summon, and it's not something you can assign to a certain time period in your life.
Oh no, not everyone has to get married, but most people do anyway, whether you share a world view of marriage or not. I'm Catholic so I know that you can be a priest and just live a single life and that's also acceptable. It's just that, as I said, most people in this world get married, even though it's not a necessity. It's only necessary that we reproduce and raise our offspring properly, and it's a good idea to have your wife/husband with you in order to do it best. You can be a single parent and have the child turn out OK, but it's a lot harder.

I agree with your second paragraph too; love is the trust and responsibility bound to another person. You don't just love your husband and wife, you love other people too. And love doesn't just "happen" either, and I wouldn't call the bond between other people, "creating" or "summoning" love, but rather learning how to practice it. It's not like you meet a special person, convince yourself you love them, and then life goes on with flowers and butterflies and everything's perfect. That, what I just mentioned, is the world view of love, and that's not the belief I hold. You meet people, you talk to them, and you become their friend. We are born and raised to love, it's something we learn, not magically summon out of the depths of our heart when the time is right.
That is not to say that I don't believe I'll ever marry someone, but I don't expect to be married. In fact, the only time I would ever even possibly consider something akin to marriage would be after I've met someone I'd actually want to marry. Because that's the only time you can actually make such a judgement, right?
Smart move. Some people are just desperate and rush into things, and that's why there's so much divorce and why there are so many live-together partners who months later are on Judge Judy. Seriously.
What it seems is that anticipating marriage to the extent that you'll actually plan your sex life around it is kind of like making a reservation at a restaurant for yourself and someone who you've never actually met. It's a plan for something that you really have no way of anticipating, yet which you're going to use to plan your entire lifestyle.
The thing about your example is that by the time you're married, you (theoretically) already love and trust the person, so it's not quite like that. Now if the person is single and says, "I'm going to wait for marriage for sex," I think your example could work with that. I think the decision to save sex for marriage goes for while you're currently in a relationship and you decide that you're not going to have sex with your boy/girlfriend until you're married to him/her. And if you guys break up, it'll be much easier to move on because you never physically attached yourself to that person. Sex glues you to the other person and you end up regretting having sex with the person to begin with.
Perhaps this "no sex until mariage" concept held some water back when marriages were, you know, arranged, but in the world of today it's a shaky investment to say the least.
<img src='/images/emoticons/smiley5.png'> ?? How is it shaky? And how is it not shaky to have sex before marriage?

What I don't understand is that you're saying that people shouldn't save sex for marriage, right? But what's wrong with that? What's honestly wrong with being patient about the most intimate thing a couple can do with one another? You have yet to stay how and why it's impractical and shaky, yet JesusRocks in his latest post described how it's practical quite beautifully. I know you said that marriage is a legal thing, sex and marriage aren't related, etc, but what does that have to do with impracticality?

The only argument I've heard towards the necessity of having sex before marriage from anyone is to test out your partner to see if they're good in bed before you spend the rest of your life with him/her. I find that awfully silly, since it's not like 2 people who honestly love each other are going to go through a divorce just because the first time was a flop. Besides, then when you find out that s/he's good in bed before marriage, you'll probably only marry him/her for the sex, if that's your reasoning for having sex before marriage in the first place.
Also, just a comment on the whole thing with the safety from STD's if two people marry as virgins...keep in mind that if either spouse has an affair, they can contract an STD and transmit it to their partner...the real way to significantly reduce the risk of contracting an STD is to practice safe sex. Always. Even if you're married.
Well people shouldn't be having affairs in the first place. It's not like it's really hard to notice if something's wrong if you live with the person either. So no, the real way to significantly reduce the risk of getting an STD is to just stay with your one partner. It may not be the popular or common thing to do, but it's certainly not impossible.
The term "safe sex" is pretty much bullshit anyways. I mean yes, latex condoms do protect you, but not 100%. The condom could break, it could fall off, there could be a little hole in it that you didn't notice, etc. I agree with the term "protection," but not "safe sex." There's no such thing, especially not today.

[Amber]

I have yet to meet a couple who wasn't at least engaged before they had sex that lasted longer than a year after they had it.
That's kind of suprising to me. I had sex with my boyfriend when I was 15, we were both virgins, and two years later we're still together and happy. We waited almost a year to have sex, as well.

I guess it's obvious that I don't think that having sex before marriage is necessarily a bad thing, but you need to be educated before you go ahead and do it. Sex can be fun and all, but with that being said, the consquences can be life-changing.
And even though waiting until marriage was not for me, it doesn't mean that I disagree with it. I have great respect for those who wait until they're married -- kudos to you.

EditSex glues you to the other person and you end up regretting having sex with the person to begin with.
If this statement is true, then how do people have one-night stands and not regret what they did, even though they will never see the person again? Yes, I know some people regret their one-night stands (usually because they were under the influence), but I'm strictly talking about the people who like having one-night stands.
And I know I can't predict the future or anything, but I highly doubt that if my boyfriend and I break-up that I will regret having sex with him. I know why I had sex with him in the first place, and I haven't regretted what I did over the past two years, so I just don't see why I will ever end up thinking, "Why the heck did I ever have sex with him?!"

[MrsSallyBakura]

If this statement is true, then how do people have one-night stands and not regret what they did, even though they will never see the person again?
I think it's because sex to these people is taken so casually and lightly that they don't know that it's wrong to have one-night stands. Plus the more you do it, the harder it is to get attached, or the easier it is to not get attached, depending on who you're talking to.
And I know I can't predict the future or anything, but I highly doubt that if my boyfriend and I break-up that I will regret having sex with him. I know why I had sex with him in the first place, and I haven't regretted what I did over the past two years, so I just don't see why I will ever end up thinking, "Why the heck did I ever have sex with him?!"
3 years altogether and 2 years with sex is quite a feat for a high school couple; I think your situation is rare. If you guys have lasted this long you may or may not have regrets, I'm not sure. If you guys were able to make your relationship so that it wasn't just about the sex I think that would have a lot to do with why you're still together. Also waiting a year instead of, say, 2 months, might have to do with it as well.
Good for you that so far it's working out fine though. =)

I was just now reminded about the time when I was in 8th grade, the girls in my class had sex ed with a nun, and one time she told us that french kissing was oral sex. -_-;;
Question: Why should a virgin teach girls about sex? How does that make any sense?

[Tatterdemalion]

It's only necessary that we reproduce and raise our offspring properly,
Well, if you're suggesting that we have an obligation to have children (which you may or may not be saying from your post) then I'd most definitely disagree with you, but I'm not even going to venture into that one.

And if I'm not getting my point across, I think I'm picking up on what I haven't expressed. See, the way you speak you make it sound as though sex is some sort of carnal notary stamp on the emotional contract that is romantic love. I'm saying that while sex may be a very intimate thing between two people, it's also a physical thing, it's the product of a desire that lies not only in the heart, but in the libido as well.

We are humans, and as much as we pride ourselves on our intellectual and emotional sophistication, we're still biological organisms of the kingdom Animalia, and I've said before (and will say again) that the three things animals want and need are food, sleep and sex. Granted, unlike food a lack of sex won't kill you in a couple of weeks, but still, that doesn't change the fact that sex is a healthy, natural process, which can be done in a way that is healthy, for the mind and spirit as well as the body, yet does not require reserving sex for a hypothetical person, a person you've never met, yet with whom you want to spend the rest of your life.

And as far as the notion that sexual relationships that are not permanent could end unpleasantly, that may be true, but I don't think it's a valid reason to say that non-marital sexual relationships are absolutely a bad thing, and should be avoided at all costs. Yes, sex goes hand in hand with a certain level of intimacy, and the end of an intimate relationship may not be pleasant, but I don't think that justifies not forming an intimate relationship unless you've preordained it to be permanent. And if you've bore first-hand witness to the disasters of pre-marital sex (or non marital sex, because "pre-marital" assumes that you're eventually going to marry), I'm not going to argue with you (how could I?), but I am going to say that you most certainly can't speak for everyone, ergo you can't speak for me.

And no, I'm not trying to present a reason that you shouldn't wait until marriage, because if I did, what kind of person would I be? A jerk, that's what. Then again, you probably already think I'm a jerk, I have a tendency to bring out that side of me in these sorts of discussions...

But no, all I'm saying is that there isn't a compelling reason that you should wait until marriage. In the end it's your own life and nobody else's, so what you do with it is your perogative. All I'm saying is that objectively speaking, waiting until marriage is not necessarily a good thing, and having non-marital sex is definitely not necessarily a bad thing. You can do what you will, but it's a choice I wouldn't make.





And a note on STD'S:

Even if there is no 100% "safe sex" (unless phone sex counts), there's still sex and markedly safer sex. And as I said, the risk of contracting an STD from your spouse has nothing to do with what you yourself do, but what your spouse does. If your spouse cheats on you without your knowledge (and if you're suggesting that a person would have to be a total idiot to not know if their spouse is cheating, then on that I also disagree), if you don't use protection then you can still contract a STD through no infidelity of your own. Also, keep in mind that it's still possible to contract an STD through means other than sexual intercourse (and no, exposure to contaminated blood is not the sort of thing that can only happen to junkies, and it doesn't give you a free pass), so it's still possible for your spouse to contract an STD, even without them cheating, and for them to unwittingly pass it to you if you don't use protection (and no, that's not a crazy, improbably, one-in-a-million occurence). So while it's true that there's no 100% way to prevent contracting an STD, there are practices that can significantly lower the likelihood of contracting one, and that includes using protection, even when you're married.

[darkarcher]

Another note on STD's:

Using "protection" is a counter-measure against pregnancy. However, STDs are often so small that they can still pass through a condom and infect the partner. In addition, many STDs are housed in areas that come into contact but aren't necessarily covered by a condom, so it's still possible to contract a good number of diseases even with protection.

[Tatterdemalion]

Very true, although using a condom/physical barrier can still serve as a preventative measure against STDs, as opposed to other forms of contraception, which do nothing in that department. And yes, I agree, safe sex and taking precautions against transmitting/contracting an STD are by no means restricted to something as simple as using a condom. That is what you were getting at, right?

[Ammeterasu77]

Marriage just solidifies that love
No no no no no.
Just because your married doesn't mean anything. I knew a couple that stayed together for like 20 years, within that time they had sex, decided to have kids, raised their family in a beautiful house. And just last year they got married.

Besides, Divorce rate is higher then marriage rate [at least in the US as far as I know]. People make mistakes in marrying others too.

As long as your responsible and aware of risks- then it's fine.

*PS does anybody else feel it's weird talking to younger kids about this? Just saying.

[Amber]

they don\'t know that it\'s wrong to have one-night stands.
It\'s not wrong to have one-night stands. It might be against your morals, but it\'s right for those who choose to have one-night stands. Other than that statement, you proved a good point -- but, what you had said originally was that sex is always going to make you attached to a person. Perhaps you meant when in a relationship, sex makes it harder for you to separate yourself from that person.If you guys were able to make your relationship so that it wasn\'t just about the sex I think that would have a lot to do with why you\'re still together.
Our relationship has never, and never will be, all about sex. Sex is just one aspect of our relationship -- a very small aspect. He is my bestfriend as well as my partner, and I love him for who he is and he loves me for who I am.Why should a virgin teach girls about sex? How does that make any sense?
It makes no sense at all! But, nuns are a little bit crazy sometimes and most of them educate students about sex as if it is something to fear. I don\'t know how putting lies into teenagers\' heads is supposed to keep them from having sex. It really is just ludicrous.

[darkarcher]

And yes, I agree, safe sex and taking precautions against transmitting/contracting an STD are by no means restricted to something as simple as using a condom. That is what you were getting at, right?
That's exactly what I was getting at. I just wanted to point out the common misconception that condom = safe sex.

[Ammeterasu77]

Though it may help with safety, no condoms aren't the only answer. Actually, the best thing to do is know your partner. Followed by a controceptive [sp?] like birth control pills etc. Then a condom to add to that. But as for STDs, basically knowing who you are with. I'm with somebody who I'm certain to have a future with [lol and was a virgin- that kinda helped to].

*insert "ask you GYN or male doctor" ad here* XD

[littlekuribohrulz20]

poor nuns....and the pope too...

they will never know what sex is like...

[Titan50]

*insert 40-year old virgin reference here*

[MrsSallyBakura]

See, the way you speak you make it sound as though sex is some sort of carnal notary stamp on the emotional contract that is romantic love.
No, I don't see it that way. I guess I'm not getting my point across either. I don't know how since I've already said stuff like
And love doesn't just "happen" either, and I wouldn't call the bond between other people, "creating" or "summoning" love, but rather learning how to practice it. It's not like you meet a special person, convince yourself you love them, and then life goes on with flowers and butterflies and everything's perfect.
And yeesh love isn't an emotion, it's a willing action to hold responsibility and trust towards and with the other person. There isn't emotion in that.
There is romance which has emotion in it but it's not the only kind of love you should have with a significant other.
And as far as the notion that sexual relationships that are not permanent could end unpleasantly, that may be true, but I don't think it's a valid reason to say that non-marital sexual relationships are absolutely a bad thing, and should be avoided at all costs. Yes, sex goes hand in hand with a certain level of intimacy, and the end of an intimate relationship may not be pleasant, but I don't think that justifies not forming an intimate relationship unless you've preordained it to be permanent. And if you've bore first-hand witness to the disasters of pre-marital sex (or non marital sex, because "pre-marital" assumes that you're eventually going to marry), I'm not going to argue with you (how could I?), but I am going to say that you most certainly can't speak for everyone, ergo you can't speak for me.
All right, thank you, that was the answer to my question.
I'm more of a third-party witness in this kind of thing; I heard it wasn't a good idea to have sex when you're not married and then my best friend and her relationships with her ex solidified that. Not quite a first-person experience but still pretty close. No, not everyone is going to be exactly the same, but I say if the majority of couples let it happen this way, then it probably means it's safer to wait.
Just because your married doesn't mean anything. I knew a couple that stayed together for like 20 years, within that time they had sex, decided to have kids, raised their family in a beautiful house. And just last year they got married.
So there are exceptions. I'm sure it happens sometimes that way, but I haven't heard of anything quite like this personally. I never thought it impossible or anything, but from the way you're describing it, both parties mutually treated each other like they were married and that's what's important; it just seems like when you're not married both partners have different mindsets and expectations and reasons to have sex, whereas they were much more mutual about it. It also helps that they weren't just in it for the sex either.
Besides, Divorce rate is higher then marriage rate [at least in the US as far as I know]. People make mistakes in marrying others too.
I'm sure that was already covered somewhere on the last page, but from what I know a lot of those mistakes come from having sex in the first place. My English professor told us that a friend's mom told him, "If you don't actively go out and date other women, you're going to marry the first woman you sleep with." He didn't take her advice, married the first woman he slept with, and they divorced. I also mentioned something about marrying just for the sex. When you look at divorce rates, you have to look at who's getting divorced and who's staying together, not just the statistics.
Our relationship has never, and never will be, all about sex. Sex is just one aspect of our relationship -- a very small aspect. He is my bestfriend as well as my partner, and I love him for who he is and he loves me for who I am.
Well then good for you; it's a HUGE mistake on some people's parts to let sex dominate the relationship and that's why people break up, usually.
It makes no sense at all! But, nuns are a little bit crazy sometimes and most of them educate students about sex as if it is something to fear. I don\'t know how putting lies into teenagers\' heads is supposed to keep them from having sex. It really is just ludicrous.
Well she tried to explain that sex wasn't dirty but even though that's what she said, she still treated it like it was. I didn't understand that it's ok to have sexual desires until my freshman year of high school when a married guy who wrote a couple of books on the subject came to my school and gave a talk on it to all of us.
*PS does anybody else feel it's weird talking to younger kids about this? Just saying.
I'm 19 by the way. Sometimes I act older and sometimes I act younger. It's usually in these kinds of discussions where I feel "naive" and "inexperienced" or whatever. :/

[NMPTILU]

Ok I read the entire first page but got bored on the second so sorry if this is a little off-topic to what you're talking about right now..

For sex before marriage, I think its a pretty open subject. It depends on the person in question.
For example, if there's a person who thinks sex before marriage is a sin, and will absolutely not have sex before they are married, well that's there choice.
However, there are some people who say they are saving themselves for marriage, but then will have sex before they are married. This might happen because, say they found someone that they really feel that they love/trust completely/all that good stuff and just want to "solidify" the relationship. (as someone else in this thread described it)
Then, there are the people who have sex purely for pleasure.

The main reason people save themselves is either because they think its a sin or because they want it to be special. If you have sex with a lot of other people, then when you finally find someone that is special to you, then its kinda like "Oh, here's another person for my list."
...sorry if my post was confusing. I have trouble putting my thoughts into words XD

[Tatterdemalion]

And love doesn't just "happen" either, and I wouldn't call the bond between other people, "creating" or "summoning" love, but rather learning how to practice it. It's not like you meet a special person, convince yourself you love them, and then life goes on with flowers and butterflies and everything's perfect.
And yeesh love isn't an emotion, it's a willing action to hold responsibility and trust towards and with the other person. There isn't emotion in that.
There is romance which has emotion in it but it's not the only kind of love you should have with a significant other.
See, there I'm, now going to have to disagree. I'd say that marriage involves two people making the decision to be responsible and trusting towards one another, but that no, love in general is not an action, or something you can do or practice. I agree it's a mistake to equate love with romance, but at the same time love is definitely not synonymous with two people sitting down and forging a lifelong partnership of shared support and responsibility. If two people do this they should love each other, yes, but the two are far from synonymous.

If love is not an emotion, then it is an attitude, but if it is anything it is not an action. I'm going to explore an example, moving out of the scope of romantic love, which could create some confusion, and move on to love in a different context. When you think about it, who do we love? We love our family, we love our friends...I know I do, and I would assume you do to, regardless of whether either of us has ever been married.

Now, I love my friends very much, and I would definitely say that I definitely feel a sort of trust and perhaps even responsibility towards them. Now, that being said, I know that I never in my life made the conscious decision to feel this way. It's not as though I ever sat down with my friends and said "okay, I know this is a big decision, but we've been casual acquaintences for a long time, and I think we should take the next step and become friends, although this is a big responsibility, and it means we're going to have to love each other" etc., etc. Having trust and the like towards my friends isn't something that I ever decided to do, and at the same time, it's not something that I could do consciously if I tried. That is to say, I couldn't stop loving my friends just by willing myself to, and at the same time I can't just decide to initiate the action of loving someone who I don't already love. (and to confirm, this sort of love we're talking about is the kind that doesn't lead to hanky panky or inappropriate touching...sorry, but I'd still feel kind of weird if I didn't say that one more time).

And what about love within a family? At what point in our lives to we take the willing action to be trusting and responsible toward our parents? Yes, in a household setting people have certain responsibilities, but at the same time, do you start loving your parents the day you first take the garbage out, or, better yet, the day that you decide that if asked you are responsible for taking the garbage out? Well, call me mister Un-Confucian, but I don't think that deciding to take on responsibility delegated to you by your parents is the same as loving your parents, I'd say it's something we do because we already love our parents.

I'd even say something bout love between siblings, but I can't...because I don't have any siblings.

Anyway, what I'm trying to say is that even though it may not be an emotion in and of itself, love is definitely a feeling that you have towards someone, and that any sort of trust or responsibility you feel towards that person are just the natural result of that feeling, not things that you yourself decide to do. At least, that's my experience. I can, or course, only speak for myself, and speaking for myself I have to disagree with you.

[Rakatung]

What is sex?

[GcarOatmealRaisinCookies]

Sex is something you'll never have.Maturity Please.

[Seri]

Fufufufu. Why discuss, when you can basically lurk off them sites with them advice and stuff.
Heres an idear, you CAN get pregnant without actual intercourse. Seems like a ripoff, later on a person would be like "Ugh and we couldn't of done it too."Love is trust in someone, love is not a feeling of highs and butterflies that you have every single time you're with the person.
I concur this motion.

[Chin]

Im not gone argue but I believe in this. (The longer you are married, the longer you can last without sex.) <img src='/images/emoticons/smiley7.png'>

[Kochiha]

Marriage more or less destroys all reason to have sex as a passionate move. When one is married, sex becomes nothing more than just a way to spew out the kids; it loses all of the romantic value that is had. That, and marriage is the surefire way to destroy a relationship. Just my two cents here.
Oh, and I may as well make reference to the stupidity of abstinence programs via Family Guy: "According to this, sex turns straight guys into gays and gays into Mexicans, everyone goes down a level!" Now while I haven't seen any abstinence program that says anything like that, there is still some borderline ridiculous stuff in those pamphlets.

[MrsSallyBakura]

Necroing this thread, just to respond.
Marriage more or less destroys all reason to have sex as a passionate move. When one is married, sex becomes nothing more than just a way to spew out the kids; it loses all of the romantic value that is had. That, and marriage is the surefire way to destroy a relationship.
Are you, or have you ever been married?

If sex is so boring during marriage, then why have my parents been going at it for 25 years? They have 6 kids, yes, but they haven't had any in over 16 years. If during those 16 years they were able to have sex without "spew out the kids," then I'm pretty sure that they don't think it's boring. I've heard other married people say that it's bullshit that sex gets boring during marriage. There are married people who don't want kids. There are married people who have only had one kid, two kids, and don't plan on having any anytime soon. Please don't make these kinds of arguments; they're naive.
Oh, and I may as well make reference to the stupidity of abstinence programs via Family Guy: "According to this, sex turns straight guys into gays and gays into Mexicans, everyone goes down a level!" Now while I haven't seen any abstinence program that says anything like that, there is still some borderline ridiculous stuff in those pamphlets.
*sigh*
Family Guy is satire. I saw that episode and they completely over-exaggerated everything. Granted it was for humorous purposes and I'm not mad at them for doing that or anything, but to say that [i]all abstinent education programs are that ridiculous is also naive. I have no doubt that some of them are, but some =/= all.

Take a look-see here: http://www.heritage.org/Research/Abstinence/wm461.cfm

Is it biased? I suppose it technically is, since it doesn't show the positives in safe-sex education. Nonetheless, it shows another perspective based on other sources that people may not have gathered before.

[RationalInquirer]

I will sum it up in one sentence. The pleasurable act of making babies in order to populate and make more babies! <img src='/images/emoticons/smiley2.png'>

[Acks]

I got heavily into sex recently. Though not always with someone else.

[Niki]

lmfao! I loved that



for all the english people lurking in this thread (and those who arent can google it) I used to work in ann summers.
but Im not a sex pest or a pervert or anything, I feel a bit out of my depth in this thread...because I have a completely different cultural outlook...then again my country has the highest teen pregnancy rate in the world so thats probably why...heh.
I think for a lot of people sex is taboo, or intimidating and shirked generally shirked by society, and I dont think it should be like that, incase you havent noticed
its bloody good fun!

as long as your careful and that! use a condom kids ;)

but...its like the coach off mean girls "DONT HAVE SEX. BECAUSE YOU WILL GET PREGNANT. AND AIDS AND DIE!"
pfffffffffff,

[sweetransvestiteatem]

Sex causes the biggest problems in life, I'm still bitter about being pregnant lol

But on the other hand...sex is fun if it's with the right person, but it's always better if there is commitment (which is probably the reason I very rarely enjoy sex with guys as alot of them seem to fear commitment)
When I say commitment, I don't mean I want to get married and have lots of babies, I mean I expect the relationship to be serious and for both partners to not be interested in seeing other people (especially not behind eachothers back)
If i'm in a relationship with someone, I don't mind them looking at other people and appreciating how good looking someone else is, but I don't expect them to try to fuck them!

I also don't like English guys, they tend to be fuelled by sex and tits and beer, most of them treat women like crap and have this insane phobia of romance...
Yup I much prefer American guys, apart from having a cute accent, from what I have experienced they are sweet and unselfish lovers (though I expect there will be some exceptions...)

[MrsSallyBakura]

Yup I much prefer American guys, apart from having a cute accent, from what I have experienced they are sweet and unselfish lovers (though I expect there will be some exceptions...)
lol there are definitely exceptions, as there are probably exceptions on the other end as well. Of course then again America is much bigger so there's more variety from different cultures and backgrounds and yadda yadda.
By the way, what kind of accent are you referring to? There's a handful of them in America. :)

I think the reason why people in general say to wait for marriage is because (ideally) by the time you're married, you know for sure that there's a major commitment to the person you're having sex with. That is not always the case, as I know from some people's personal experiences, but for the most part why would you want to marry someone if there wasn't any desire at all to be with that person for a long time? The reason why there are so many divorces is because they say that they claim they love each other at first and they have the desire for commitment, they just don't know how to keep it lasting for 5, 10, 20 years. They don't know how to keep the relationship going because for the most part they only learn the first steps in being in a relationship, but when they get beyond what they see in the movies or even from their parents' or whoevers' experiences, it's just kinda like, "Now what?"

And you can be married and not have kids. I think that's fine, as long as in case you do get pregnant, you accept it and try to live with it as best you can. It's just that some people are meant for having more children and some just aren't. Depends on the couple and the living/financial situations.

[Tatterdemalion]

Here's a general thought, with regards to waiting until marriage. What if you're gay? In the United States, if you're gay you can't legally marry your partner in most states. So, what would the "no sex until marriage" argument suggest for gays in America, and other parts of the world where marriage is not an option?

[MrsSallyBakura]

That's actually an entirely different debate right there. I'd rather not get too involved in it seeing that it's a much more controversial and sensitive topic, but I'll breeze through what I've learned from other people and just kind of pasted together.

Since it's mostly a Christian belief that you should wait until marriage before you have sex, it's also mostly a Christian belief that gay marriage shouldn't be allowed. Unlike popular belief, the Bible only believes that homosexual sex is wrong, not really anything else considered homosexual. That's essentially why these people speak out against gay marriage (the Bible also says that "fornication" is wrong).
On Fictionpress.com, I actually read this essay about a lesbian raised Christian and she had many discussions with her fundamental mother, and her mother was being very loving about her daughter's decision and made it a point to clarify that only homosexual sex is wrong, not homosexuality itself.

So yes, like I said, entirely different topic.

[Tatterdemalion]

It's not an entirely different debate, it's the same issue, sex within the context of marriage as compared to sex without. Whether homosexuality, or same-sex intercourse is right or wrong is a different topic, but that's not really what I'm concerned with. I'm talking about sex and marriage, that's it.

That is, if it is, as you've suggested, good idea to wait until marriage to have sex, then what about same sex couples? What you think about homosexuality or same sex marriage being right or wrong is irrelevant, because either way the fact of the matter still stands that, in many parts of the world, including the United States, same-sex couples cannot marry, and therefore can not possibly have sex when married, leaving the two options of either having non-marital sex or remaining abstinent for their entire lives.

Now, if you're going to suggest that marriage is somehow necessary or very important to developing the sort of relationship in which it would be acceptable for two people to have sex (something with which I would still disagree), then what does that say about same sex couples? Would you say that because same sex couples cannot marry that they can never be ready to have sex, or would you say that because same sex couples can develop meaningful relationships equivocal to those of married couples, marriage is not necessary to have sex? Once you bring same sex couples into this, the "no sex until marriage" argument seems to have a major flaw.

I think that in part what it demonstrates is that we're putting too much emphasis on marriage as an institution, without consideration of the fact that all of these things that you suggest are necessary to have sex, like life-long committment, could very easily both exist without marriage, and not exist with marriage.

I mean, think about it, there are a great many homosexual couples who, although they can't legally marry, have still been together, lived together, supported one another and the like for decades...and likewise, there are plenty of heterosexuals who marry, and later divorce, or cheat on one another, or both, or, even if they remain married, grow cold and distant...so in the grander picture, exactly how significant is marriage as an institution to peoples' relationships with one another?

[OverMind]

I think one thing you are overlooking is the fact that homosexual communities everywhere (in the western world at least) are lobbying for their right to marry. But, taking what you've argued (i.e. basically the lesser value of marriage as an institution in modern society, using homosexuality as a crutch), wouldn't this be pointless? Why are they fighting for it then if, as you've stated, they (and everyone else) can live without it? If they're fighting for it, is it not something they want, or perhaps, need?

Heck, I bet every fricken' country/region in the world has/had some marital taboos that, now, we'd think were insane. Homosexual marriage, to some degree, is analogous to interracial marriages back before the civil rights movement came into full swing in the states (in fact, there were laws prohibiting it ... kind of like how there are laws now prohibiting gay marriage). Perhaps we can take a look at a country like India where skin color really hasn't ever been an issue (despite a very heterogeneous-skinned population), but it's been more of an issue of caste ... something you're born into unwillingly or without choice, like homosexuality.

But, all of these groups of people have fought for their right to marry even when they could have just stopped caring about what other people thought of them and continued on with their lives, maintaining their "non-traditional" relationships. So, I ask, why? Why pursue this pointless endeavour?

[Tatterdemalion]

I'm not trying to say that marriage is completely pointless, and that we should do away with it, or using homosexuality as a crutch for anything. What I'm saying is that marriage is in no way necessary for people to have a stable, loving relationship, and therefore, assuming MrsSallyBakura is correct in saying that this sort of relationship is necessary for two people to have sex, marriage is not a prerequisite for healthy sexual intercourse.

If people want to get married, that's great, I'm doing absolutely nothing to say that they shouldn't. Although, for the record, I'd be inclined to say that a great deal of this fight for marriage has more to do with the legal and symbolic/cultural implications than the notion that marriage will somehow make the relationship between the parties involved more meaningful than it already is.

That is, the argument is almost universally "I legitimately love my partner, so let us marry" as opposed to "let me marry so I can legitimately love my partner"

[Kanariya674]

I don't think sex is a bad thing. Due to several reasons, it's just become one of those taboo things, and therefore just so overhyped. I'm comfortable with the subject, because I don't think it's really that big of a deal. It's something we as humans do, whether for pleasure or creation. The question is when is the right time.

I'm sixteen, and I've had this conversation openly with my father. He always says, whenever you feel is the right time. Of course, I realize not every parent will say that to their kids, and teenagers will take it different ways. Some will consider it, some will use it as an excuse to get as much sex as they want. It just depends on their maturity level and how much they trust their parents.

I've had my share of intimate relations with a couple of men and women. My first time was with a girlfriend of mine, and I was fourteen. I was curious, and I wanted to experience it without it really being a danger (pregnancy). I don't go having sex with every person I find attractive - for me, sex is not truly enjoyable unless it is with someone you trust. I think it's healthy to get exposure to it, because the more secretive it is, the more you want to do it. I've been exposed, and it's just something I do from time to time. It's nice, and I like it, but my life isn't centered around it.

Some aren't as flexible to experiment with the same sex so easily, and that causes some issues. And in that case, it depends on the person - do it, just be very safe, or not take the risk and wait. And you know, if the condom breaks, I don't think it's either partners' fault, unless it was intended. Crap happens, it was an accident. But then we go into abortion, and all that is really controversial, and I really don't feel like talking about it.

I'm not particularly fond of one night stands, because for me the ultimate pleasure lies in the emotion, but some like them, and that's just how they are. For some it's a physical need, to others it's a way to express feelings beyond words. It all varies, so it'll always be a debatable topic until humans eventually die.

Well, all this basically sums up to my opinion of sex not being a bad thing. People just warp it to become something really bad, and therefore taboo, and then it becomes more of big deal than what it really is.

Oh yes, one more thing. Don't have babies until you're ready, not only financially but mentally as well. That means absolute dedication to your child. And that's why teenagers should never be parents. xD

[MrsSallyBakura]

For some it's a physical need
This just stuck out to me.

I don't think anyone needs sex badly enough to have a one-night stand with someone you don't know. I think that's underestimating your free will and self-control.
I don't think sex is a bad thing.
I don't think sex is a bad thing either. I think sex is a very good thing. If it was a bad thing then why would it be how we reproduce? How we keep long relationships lasting?
The thing about sex is responsibility. I think it's a bad thing to take sex lightly without realizing what exactly you're giving away or getting yourself into when you have it. You're right in that there's a certain maturity level you should have before you go out and have it because even if you realize that maybe it wasn't the best time to have it after all, first of all you have the capability to realize it and secondly you have a better idea of how to fix your life and move on from the mistake. Also when you have it when you're more immature, you don't appreciate it as much.
Oh yes, one more thing. Don't have babies until you're ready, not only financially but mentally as well. That means absolute dedication to your child. And that's why teenagers should never be parents. xD
Yes, I absolutely 100% agree. Which is why I say teenagers shouldn't be having sex in this culture. As a whole, high schoolers just aren't mature enough because they have emotional struggles and they're stressed out with their studies and whatnot. Adding sex into all of that, with the risk of getting pregnant or getting and STD, along with the emotional implications, just doesn't mix in well with high school life.

The thing about abortion, whether or not you think it's right, you still got pregnant. Having an abortion may terminate the pregnancy, but it doesn't get rid of the fact that you got pregnant in the first place, and that itself still makes you remember that you got pregnant. Having an abortion doesn't terminate your memory. I've also read real-life accounts from women who had abortions who when they were going into it, they thought that it would make all their worries go away, and maybe while that's temporary, even years later they still think about what their child could have been like.
If you don't have sex in the first place, you can't get pregnant, therefore there is no child for you to tactically think about. The child never existed.

That's all I have for now.

[Kanariya674]

I appreciate your opinion, MrsSally.I've also read real-life accounts from women who had abortions who when they were going into it, they thought that it would make all their worries go away, and maybe while that's temporary, even years later they still think about what their child could have been like.
Oh of course you're going to remember the baby. An abortion has to be one of the most difficult things a woman has to make in her life. I support them, but I don't really like the thought of them. It's a hard topic for me, and I haven't even had one.If you don't have sex in the first place, you can't get pregnant, therefore there is no child for you to tactically think about. The child never existed.
Yeah, but in the event of rape, the victim didn't want to be pregnant, I would imagine. But I'm assuming we're talking about consensual sex here, and then in that case, I definitely agree. If you want to avoid a pregnancy, point blank, don't even step near sex. So it depends on the person, and how much of a risk they want to take. That's what I was trying to say in my first post. Sometimes nothing happens, sometimes shit goes down the drain. So many opinions...I couldn't live with myself if I was pregnant at sixteen.This just stuck out to me.

I don't think anyone needs sex badly enough to have a one-night stand with someone you don't know. I think that's underestimating your free will and self-control.
Look at prostitutes. Look at the men who pay for them, for a one night stand. There's some evidence right there of a person wanting sex enough to have a one night stand with someone they don't know. That's what I mean by physical need - don't care who it is, as long as they get it. And at that point, I think it becomes rather out of hand.

[killshot]

I don't think anyone needs sex badly enough to have a one-night stand with someone you don't know. I think that's underestimating your free will and self-control.
Have you ever heard the saying, "thinking with the wrong head?" Free will and self-control are no match for horniness and desperation. Which is why I say teenagers shouldn't be having sex in this culture. As a whole, high schoolers just aren't mature enough because they have emotional struggles and they're stressed out with their studies and whatnot. Adding sex into all of that, with the risk of getting pregnant or getting and STD, along with the emotional implications, just doesn't mix in well with high school life.
I don't agree with this. High school kids aren't mature enough? When do you suppose they will be mature enough? I think it's better to figure this stuff out early and get the awkwardness out of the way. What better time to experiment with sex than in high school? What are you talking about when you say kids are stressed with their studies? High school is the easiest time you will ever have in your life. If someone can't handle high school then they aren't going to make it when they are faced with real problems later on.

[Tatterdemalion]

I don't agree with this. High school kids aren't mature enough? When do you suppose they will be mature enough? I think it's better to figure this stuff out early and get the awkwardness out of the way. What better time to experiment with sex than in high school? What are you talking about when you say kids are stressed with their studies? High school is the easiest time you will ever have in your life. If someone can't handle high school then they aren't going to make it when they are faced with real problems later on.
Speaking hyperbolically, it's always said that teenagers are stupid. You know this as well as I do. And even if they're not, it doesn't change the fact that they're rash, irrational, unpredictable, and all that good stuff. Their hormones are all over the place, they're constantly being confronted with new emotions and sensations, which are indeed far more intense than those experienced in adulthood (I think poet Lisel Mueller put it best in describing it as "the too bright days, the too dark nights of adolescence"), as well as increased mental faculties, which can be especially trying if the teenager in question is one who's inclined to use his/her head

I mean, even before adding on the complications of schoolwork, a busy schedule, social hooplah, and everything else, simply existing as a teenager is a very trying and stressful thing, something that science itself will attest to.

So what you have here are a breed who are in a position where they are constantly faced with new, unfamiliar experiences, and at pretty fast rate, while at the same time they often do not have, or are only just developing the faculties through which to deal with them. We're talking about people who oftentimes are still struggling to understand them, let alone cope with them. On top of that, add the fact that social stimuli play a far more significant role in both adolescents' lives and adolescents' understanding of their lives. And even in addition to that you have to consider the fact that you have an increase in gray matter during the adolescense, so even sensation alone is far more overwhelming in teenagers than in younger children or adults.

Now, taking all of that into consideration, you're saying that in spite of this tremendous wall of instability, this is the ideal time for them to experiment with what is one of the most intense and harrowing experiences possible, on a physical level, a social level and an emotional level, which can still cause tremendous interpersonal conflicts and emotional struggles well into adulthood...that somehow it's a perfect time for it...you know, somehow I don' think that's a good idea. Come to think of it, it's an incredibly bad idea. It's like the equivalent of giving a can of gasoline to a kid who's already playing with matches.




Oh, and if high school is the easiest time you will have in your life, then quite clearly you're going to the wrong school.

Not to get too far off topic, but this is the problem, people don't take education seriously. There's this notion that somehow high school is just some sort of senseless program dictated by society, and that the point of it is to just go through the motions. And I'd be inclined to say that the sort of people who hold such views are the sort of people who shouldn't be allowed within 100 yards of a school building.

If a person's school is a real school (and not a sorry excuse for a school), and offers a serious, rigorous, in-depth and comprehensive academic program, and that person's life is easy-going, care free and oblivious, then that person's doing something wrong. Or they're just not trying. In which case, they can do whatever they want, but they don't have a right to complain when I criticize them and their kind ad nauseum, as I so often do (and so do you).

And if their school is the sort of place where you can pass just by showing up, then the responsibility of handling their education during that time period is entirely on them. So if in addition to that they have the time to go out and have sex, then they have no life whatsoever...and if they have no life, who's going to sleep with them?

[MrsSallyBakura]

Thank you, this was actually the point I was trying to make.

On an emotional level, high school wasn't easy at all. Long story short I had some serious relationship problems in high school and always thought about how people didn't like me or how lonely I was, and some people's actions towards me actually confirmed that. I think college is a lot easier. It's still hard on some levels academically and socially but I know that I don't go through nearly as many emotional insecurities of meeting new people and whatnot at college than I did in high school. Adding sex into my college life would turn things around if I got pregnant or got an STD, or even on an emotional level if my boyfriend and I decide to break up or something, plus a financial level if I did get pregnant, but it would have been much worse if I had added it into my high school life because I was so insecure about my social life and if something had gone wrong with the sex life, in the end it would have made things a lot worse for me.

I was more mature than most of the people in my class, in fact even though I'm 19 some people think I'm older, sometimes as old as mid-20's. I was probably more mature than a good chunk of the people having sex. That doesn't mean I was ready for it.
Have you ever heard the saying, "thinking with the wrong head?" Free will and self-control are no match for horniness and desperation.
See, I know it might not be very sound coming from a girl, but I'm not sure if I entirely believe that animalistic instincts can truly overpower your human will.
Would a guy like to back me up on this, or do guys unanimously think that horniness can't be overcome?

[darkarcher]

I'll vouch for this. Just because something is a base impulse does not mean you cannot overcome it.

[SilverFox]

Thread is old, Content has been removed by me, I realise some of this is quoted but it's easier to remove all of it at once than just some.

[Kanariya674]

I agree. However, anyone can control it, but do they bother?

I don't think teenagers are in the position to have children. High school is a part of a teenager's life where they figure out themselves, decide their goals, and prepare for them. That shouldn't include raising a human being.

With that said, I don't think some adults should be having babies, either. They might be adults by age, but I'm sure people can agree there are some adults who just shouldn't have children, because they are just not mentally prepared.I find it to be annoying that everyone around me thinks virginity is something to be ashamed of... fools.
If you can remain a virgin by your twenties, I find that an accomplishment. >> Not saying sex is bad, but with all the peer pressure and what not, it means you probably have a strong will. Either that or just don't give a crap.

[killshot]

Would a guy like to back me up on this, or do guys unanimously think that horniness can't be overcome?
This is sort of an exaggeration on my part. There are a lot of factors to consider such as the attractiveness of the other person, how long its been since the last time you've had sex, and the level of intoxication of both parties. Oh, and if high school is the easiest time you will have in your life, then quite clearly you're going to the wrong school.
I can't speak for anyone's school except my own, but from what I have heard from other people the standard of education is pretty lax no matter which high school you attend. When I attended high school, I found that those around me that did poorly in school only did so because of a lack of interest on their part. I was pretty lazy back then too, but I always could complete my work with minimal effort so it didn't affect my grades much. It seems to me like our school had about 10 people who had the intelligence and determination to do something great with their life while the rest were destined for middle to low income jobs or sometimes prison. What I'm trying to say is that many people that go to public school can't really screw up their life any worse than it already is by having sex and most people who are smart enough to have a decent future are mature enough to handle having sex. This is of course doesn't factor in pregnancy or STDs, but unless they were taught abstinence only in Sex Ed, they should know how to take precautions against both.

What I was getting at with high school being the best time to experiment was that there will always (or at least most of the time) be a safety net to fall back on at this age. Even if someone did screw up and get pregnant, they won't have to worry about having money for the bills and food to live on. No matter how bad you screw up in high school, it will be nothing compared to the shitstorm that awaits you if you are out on your own. Hormones or not, I still say the safety of high school is a better time to lose your virginity than later on when the choices you make start to really matter.I find it to be annoying that everyone around me thinks virginity is something to be ashamed of... fools.
I also think of these things as a 'Merit Badge':
*no piercings *no tatoos *never smoked
This way of thinking bothers me. You sound like one of those strait-edge punks. Its fine if you don't want to smoke or drink ( I don't), but don't pretend that you are getting a more "pure" version of life by not doing these things. How are you superior to someone who chooses to smoke or get tattoo's or piercings?

It also bothers me that people treat girls who have a lot of sex as "unclean." A man can fuck half the women on the planet and we would hand him a trophy. What's wrong with a woman enjoying sex? Branding women as "whores" or "sluts" is only punishing them for doing what comes natural. When can we as a society move out of the dark ages and just accept that people like sex? The world would be a better place if we could just stop viewing sex as something perverted or taboo.

[MrsSallyBakura]

What I was getting at with high school being the best time to experiment was that there will always (or at least most of the time) be a safety net to fall back on at this age. Even if someone did screw up and get pregnant, they won't have to worry about having money for the bills and food to live on.
The person's parents have to worry about that, though, and if the parents aren't well-off then they have to deal with the consequences in a way that can make their financial lives really suffer. I don't think that's very fair, do you? Sometimes parents will do as many of the right things as they can but it's ultimately their teenager who makes the decision. I didn't make the decision not to have sex because my parents told me not to; I made that choice myself.

But even if the teenager does have really rich parents, I don't think it's right to put the consequences on other people for a situation like sex either. If you made the decision, you should have to deal with the consequences. IT doesn't do anyone any good to get into a situation like that and not go through the consequences; how will that affect their maturity?
It also bothers me that people treat girls who have a lot of sex as "unclean." A man can fuck half the women on the planet and we would hand him a trophy. What's wrong with a woman enjoying sex? Branding women as "whores" or "sluts" is only punishing them for doing what comes natural. When can we as a society move out of the dark ages and just accept that people like sex? The world would be a better place if we could just stop viewing sex as something perverted or taboo.
I'm mixed about this paragraph. First of all, I agree that it's absolutely unfair for women to be punished for liking sex. That being said, I don't think anyone should be "sleeping around" with a bunch of people just because it's "natural" or whatever, man or woman. The desire to have sex yes is natural but there is such a thing as too much of a good thing. Anything that is inherently good can become bad if twisted enough. I think everyone can agree that there is a point where sex becomes abusive and used for completely selfish means despite the fact that sex involves 2 people.

Over and over in this topic, the mindset of "it's perverted and wrong" is brought into discussion despite the fact that as far as I know, the people who are against recreational sex aren't necessarily against it because they believe that sex in and of itself is wrong. I for one believe that we as people should be comfortable with the thought of sex because it is a good thing. There is nothing wrong with wanting sex. My freshman year of high school there was a guy who came in and taught us some abstinence education. The interesting thing is that he said that it was OK to want sex, you just needed to be responsible with what you do with that desire and not let it take control of your actions. Just because people want to wait until marriage or something, it doesn't mean that they're uptight about it, it just means that they want to wait because they view it as special and sacred.
It's good to want sex. And if you don't want it, that's OK too, as long as you know that it's OK for others to want it.

[Tatterdemalion]

I can't speak for anyone's school except my own, but from what I have heard from other people the standard of education is pretty lax no matter which high school you attend. When I attended high school, I found that those around me that did poorly in school only did so because of a lack of interest on their part. I was pretty lazy back then too, but I always could complete my work with minimal effort so it didn't affect my grades much. It seems to me like our school had about 10 people who had the intelligence and determination to do something great with their life while the rest were destined for middle to low income jobs or sometimes prison.
Perhaps this is indicative of the state of the Red Neckington school district, but I have to say from experience that this is by no means representative of a universal standard of public education (or private education, those sorts of schools still exist, even if you yourself didn't go to one). I myself have been a life long New York City public school student, and as much as I complain about certain aspects of it, it's not as though it's the sort of place where you can breeze through academics with minimal effort just because you're the only person in the class who's willing to pay attention. And yes, some public schools are better than others, but still, there's enough of a gap

So as I said, you went to the wrong school.What I'm trying to say is that many people that go to public school can't really screw up their life any worse than it already is by having sex and most people who are smart enough to have a decent future are mature enough to handle having sex.
Keep in mind, this has nothing to do with intellectual maturity, it's physiological and psychological, and no matter how "mature" or intelligent, or well behaved a teenager is, that doesn't mean that they're not still a teenager, as pleasing as it may be to think otherwise. It's not a matter of having the sophistication or mental capacity to handle the practical responsibilities of whatever may arise from having sex, it's a matter of being able to emotionally and psychologically deal with what is a very intense, stressful and harrowing experience on multiple levels at a time when you largely do not have the capacity to do so.

It doesn't matter how smart you are, it doesn't matter how responsible you are, all of the intelligence in the world can't overcome science. What I was getting at with high school being the best time to experiment was that there will always (or at least most of the time) be a safety net to fall back on at this age. Even if someone did screw up and get pregnant, they won't have to worry about having money for the bills and food to live on. No matter how bad you screw up in high school, it will be nothing compared to the shitstorm that awaits you if you are out on your own.
You do realize that you just said that high school is the ideal time for an unplanned pregnancy, right?

And what is this about a safety net? What kind of "safety net" are you talking about? The only thing I can possibly think of would be your parents, and that being said, keep in mind that, at least with people I've know, I find it very hard to imagine that if they were to get pregnant the response from their parents would be "That's wonderful, I've always wanted to be a grandmother. You just don't worry your little head and leave the hard part to us." To the contrary, it would be something more like "Get the hell out of my house." Also, there's the assumption that the parents would be in a position where they're able to provide for an additional child. If we're talking about a low income family, or even a lower middle income family, or a family that already has a considerable number of children, it's not as though suddenly having to provide for another child is always going to be a walk in the park. So assuming everything's going to be okay because "someone else can do it" makes some pretty bold assumptions, on top of which it's a rather haughty position to take.

So much for your safety net.

Also, even if this safety net did exist, the question is then what? Let's say your parents do have the means to take care of your child when you're a teenager, and are actually willing to do so. But then what? In just a few years you're not going to be in high school anymore. So then you're going to be a young adult, with a child, It's not as though your kid's going to be old enough to take care of himself, childcare becomes even more trying, more expensive, and more work as children get older. Babies just sleep all day, but raising somewhat older children is a very, very demanding responsibility.

So that being said, if you get pregnant in high school, you're still going to end up a few years later as a young adult, out on your own having to raise a young child. And how are you going to do this? You don't have any specialized skills, no source of income, no workforce experience, no higher education...so you're going to be in a position where you have to go to college, or start out trying to hold a serious job, which is difficult enough for people without children, yet you're going to have the added responsibility of having to provide for your young child at the same time. Which is probably the biggest shitstorm possible.

Oh, and there's the added problem of being a single parent (unless you get married at 16), which is a problem enough, I'm sure I don't have to explain why.

Now, that being said, if you have sex as an adult, you have nothing to fall back on, right? You're out in the world on your own and you have absolutely nothing with which to support yourself, correct? See, that's not true, though, is it? If you're an adult then you have an education, you have skills, you have an income, you have the ability to do specialized jobs, you should have savings or investments, you have a means through which to provide for yourself, and your family. Even if you become pregnant unintentionally, this is still something you can rely on to support you. That is your safety net. And that's a real safety net, because it's something that you can always rely on, and will do a better job of supporting you than an assumption like :oh, it's okay, my parents will run my life for me."

Unless, of course, you were referring to something else, although I can't possibly imagine what.

[Tatterdemalion]

Also, one more post, because this stuck out to me this time around.This way of thinking bothers me. You sound like one of those strait-edge punks. Its fine if you don't want to smoke or drink ( I don't), but don't pretend that you are getting a more "pure" version of life by not doing these things. How are you superior to someone who chooses to smoke or get tattoo's or piercings?
Now, I can't speak for SilverFox, but just from reading his post, it seems to me that what he's saying is a response to the notion that somehow not having sex is something to be decried. That is to say, that virginity isn't something to be ashamed of, not that sex is something you should be ashamed of.

I'm just saying, keep in mind that if someone has some sort of pride in their lifestyle, whatever it may be, that doesn't mean that it's an attack on your lifestyle. Just because someone values something that they do, it doesn't mean that they look down on anyone who does differently.

[SilverFox]

Thread is old, Content has been removed by me, I realise some of this may be quoted but it's easier to remove all of it at once than just some.

[killshot]

Because these are things that are unnatural and unneccessary, and with tattoos and piercings specifically, these are two things that can result in you being passed up in an employment opportunity, as in these things are, for lack of a slightly softer term, frowned upon by the majority of society, hence superior by beating calls to participate via peer pressure, own idea, or because of being influenced by another external source. eg a movie.
Unnecessary perhaps, but not unnatural. Human beings have a desire to express themselves through a variety of different mediums and body art is just another form of expression. Some people feel a need to distinguish themselves through their appearance. I think you give peer pressure too much credit in this situation. As for employers passing up people with tattoos or piercings, I think we will start seeing a change in what is considered acceptable in the near future. Body art has nothing to do with how well someone can perform a job. The idea that tattoos make you a poor employee is the result of a generational gap between the people in charge and young people trying to find a job.
What I don't have a problem with is girls getting branded a slut because of the way they are dressed, if you are dressed as a prostitute like 95% of the females my age, you can't complain, it comes with the outfit.
I hear this all the time and have never really understood the logic behind this. Is there some kind of prostitute uniform that lets people immediately tell if she is a whore or not? Where do you draw the line between a classy outfit and a slut suit? Should all women be covered head to toe and not show any skin at all? What is an appropriate skin to clothing ratio?

I do agree with you on the subject of the media misleading young girls. I don't like the idea of celebrity worship, but it seems to be the cool thing to do now. Celebrities need to pay more attention to the people they are influencing or the world just needs to boycott this shit until people are independent enough to make their own decisions. Since the later will never happen, celebrities need to be more aware of the position they are in.

[onidragon]

The main problem I have with the arguement that "Sex should be saved until marriage" is that what if you don't believe in marriage as the ultimate sign that you want to live and die with someone? Yes, you get tax cuts, but what happens if the relationship does not work out? You divorce, lose half of your worldly things, and you get a truly awful since of loss.

My advice is this: when you think you're ready, you're ready. That might be a little naive, but whatever.

Also, I think masterbation should not be labeled as a dirty practice anymore, as in a way, it could be used to promote not only safe sex, but waiting until AFTER High School before you get your freak on. Think about that, me hearties.

[Omega]

Cunnilingus tastes better and won't get you pregnant.

[PegasusJCrawford]

Yay! Lets talk about sex baby! :D

Sorry I'm not reading the arguments that are going on. I just wanted to comment on the thread because its about sex and I'm immature that way. ^.^

[DarthWario]

I think sex is discussed a lot more openly nowadays, and that is very good. It should be taken out of the context of it being a private and embarrasing subject.

Masturbation is more commonly accepted and is no long the product of Satan or such.

However, porn has warped many peoples interpretations of sex. Kids who are exposed to porn should be taught what its actually like, not left to take the emotional side out of sex.

[Fat1Fared]

Very good point darth

However I think you have all mixed up sex and love, they are too very different things, One is a primitive reproductive system and physical action, which has a few pleasurable side effects and a few unpleasurable side effects

The other is an emotion, which is very diverse and individual, it can be as deep or as shallow as the person it is coming from and can be shown a million different ways

Though it is common belief that they are linked, they are not and this belief is merely a hang-over from an early form of birth control. As throughout history we have made it wrong and taboo, so we can try and stop birth rates going out of control.

You can have one without the other very easily and it should be up to the couple involved, not group choice. I have one mate who has a fuck partner, the guy and girl involved are both very nice people and not sex addicted or anything, they just find each other attractive but do not want an emotional relationship.

I would not want this personally and would want a relationship more than sex, as believe sex is not a big thing, but I also think the only thing with it, is are you willing to take it risks, if not, don't do it, if you are, do not worry, it is your choice and only reason people get all emotionally messed up, is because society tells them too.

Also do not believe, the lie that we are the only age of FREE SEX, we are not. every age in history has it, we just like to say we don't.The Victorian age is good example of this, they are made out to be ultimate age for anti-sex...etc but really they were very sexually active, aspecially the men who would have several partners for sex and prostitution was unbelievability high.

It is why birth rates did go out control at this time lol

Finally do not think marriage is a true form of love, as it is not, you can bond your life, by choices, not a gold ring and piece of paper. I know people who are very much in love, live together have children...etc but have not married and know people who have married, but then few years down line, stopped loving one another and gone their departed ways

So saving sex for marriage is foolish, as it is not a 100% that your marriage is the end of your search for love and sex is something you should be allowed to do, as long as you know side effects, (though I would leave it for later teens,)

Like I said, I believe love is not always forever, some can last, but a lot of time it does not, as people change and when do, may change to person who wants something else so do not let love choose your choice, as love is not always a good thinker, use your head and think it through.

Also it should be your choice, not societies, as it is your risk and so should be a choice only you can make
PS=do not get worked up over it ether, as though it is not sin, it is not the most wonderful thing out there ether

[Kanariya674]

Oh yeah, one more thing. Sex is nice and great guys, but make sure when you're sixteen, you use protection every time.

A friend of mine just told me she's pregnant. She's sixteen, and if the condom broke, I can understand - that just really sucks. But no, she said, "Oh, we didn't use protection". She is very convinced she can take care of this baby. She's very excited.

How do you not use protection? I guess she is comfortable her mother can take care of the baby for her. I couldn't do that to my mother - she's working, she's already had two kids. She's fifty, she doesn't want to take care of a baby. I don't know how her mother feels about it, but I'd be freaking apeshit. I guess they are really excited as a family to have another child in the house, and if that means the sixteen year old is pregnant, then so be it. >>

My mother would beat me. No joke, she'd fuck me up. I always use protection just because I'm scared of her.

So yes. Always use protection.

[DarkPhoenix]

and birth control don't forget birth control combined with condoms equals 99.9% of NOT getting pregnant

[Tatterdemalion]

Keep in mind that there's only one real way to be 100% certain of not getting someone pregnant. I know that condoms, and the pill, and all that stuff work sometimes, but there's still a chance of pregnancy. Is that a chance you want to take?

I'm sure it's been said before, but there's only one way to be certain that you won't have children. Some people might not like to hear it, and some may thing I'm being square because of it, but it's the truth. It's something that we've all been taught in school, and even if we haven't been, it's something that should be taught in schools.

Yes, that's right, you all know just what I mean. The only way to be 100% certain of not getting someone pregnant is a vasectomy. Go out and get one today, before it's too late.

[Fat1Fared]

you know my dad told me to get one of those, that is true as well

[Oath]

Yes, that's right, you all know just what I mean. The only way to be 100% certain of not getting someone pregnant is a vasectomy. Go out and get one today, before it's too late.

You forgot about abstinence

When it comes to sex, you dont fuck to fuck, but fuck to enjoy, and you do it responsibly

[darkarcher]

You forgot about abstinence

He was being sarcastic.

[killshot]

Keep in mind that there's only one real way to be 100% certain of not getting someone pregnant. I know that condoms, and the pill, and all that stuff work sometimes, but there's still a chance of pregnancy. Is that a chance you want to take?

I'm sure it's been said before, but there's only one way to be certain that you won't have children. Some people might not like to hear it, and some may thing I'm being square because of it, but it's the truth. It's something that we've all been taught in school, and even if we haven't been, it's something that should be taught in schools.

Yes, that's right, you all know just what I mean. The only way to be 100% certain of not getting someone pregnant is a vasectomy. Go out and get one today, before it's too late.

Thank you. That just made my day.

[MrsSallyBakura]

I'll admit, Tatter, that did make me laugh.

[Tatterdemalion]

It's good to get such a positive response from everyone. Thank you.

[Kanariya674]

Tatter, I am so glad you enlightened me on this. I'm a Junior in High School, and you're right - they definitely do not tell us about male birth control. I first learned of it after seeing your post.

[Fat1Fared]

Kan I cannot believe they do not tell you of male birth control, that is well insane, is it that do not think you should know or that it is womans responsibility, ether way it is just mad

However though tatters idea is actually almost 100%, most men (me included) are scared of letting someone do anything like that to their penis and so will not do it.

[Kanariya674]

Kan I cannot believe they do not tell you of male birth control, that is well insane, is it that do not think you should know or that it is womans responsibility, ether way it is just mad

However though tatters idea is actually almost 100%, most men (me included) are scared of letting someone do anything like that to their penis and so will not do it.

Oh, they emphasize birth control for women or condoms. But no one ever mentions the idea of male birth control. I think it's because at my age (15 - 18), the cheapest way to avoid pregnancy is going to be the pill/patch/whatever, or the condom. I'm not sure about male birth control and how expensive it is, but I can tell you it's easier to get a hold of a condom then plan a vasectomy.

But not even mentioning it is kind of weird too. I have never heard of it in my life. I've heard of tyeing the fallopian tubes..

[darkarcher]

And male birth control is permanent, unlike a pill you take to prevent conception.

[Revenge]

give me liberty, or give me sex!

wait-

[Kanariya674]

And male birth control is permanent, unlike a pill you take to prevent conception.

In all seriousness, does this mean the man is not able to ejaculate after having a vasectomy?

[darkarcher]

It means that a man's ejaculate does not contain sperm after having a vasectomy.

Which could be a real bummer if you ever plan to have kids.

[Kanariya674]

..Ouch.

Kind of like tyeing the tubes, huh? Always will prevent pregnancy, but you have to deal with it for the rest of your life. I want to have children when I'm older, so I always will have to take the risk. And so will my man.

The easy way out would be for me to stick with women, but, I'm a sucker for falling in love.

[Fat1Fared]

you cannot just throw man out of picture kan???

PS Dark, think they can remove it now, though not 100% sure

[darkarcher]

It's exactly like tying the tubes...just a different pair of tubes.

[AsteriskRocks]

And male birth control is permanent, unlike a pill you take to prevent conception.

Objection
They use Vasectomy clamps when they perform vesectomies now...therefore making it reversible.

[darkarcher]

Even so, without completely disconnecting the vas deferens you're running the risk of sperm making it through.

[AsteriskRocks]

Even so, without completely disconnecting the vas deferens you're running the risk of sperm making it through.

They are quite effective and I don't believe they let anything through till they are unclamped.

[Fat1Fared]

Dark, have to say, unless the opr is messed up by doctor, Asterisk is right

[darkarcher]

*shrugs* Okay then.

[AsteriskRocks]

*shrugs* Okay then.

There would be several malpractice lawsuits dontcha think?

[MrsSallyBakura]

I first learned about a vasectomy in Malcolm in the Middle...

But that's because I went to Catholic high school, lol.

Though I think we talked about it in my A&P class my senior year for like, 2 seconds.

[Kanariya674]

Though I think we talked about it in my A&P class my senior year for like, 2 seconds.

Yeah. If talked about, it'll last for that long.

Watch me be the only one out of my friends who has never heard of a vasectomy. I can't tell, since everyone is so 'hush hush'.

you cannot just throw man out of picture kan???

Oh I'm not. But if I was just with women there would be no pregnancy issues. xD Just a little joke on my behalf, sorry it was misunderstood.

[loveistears]

Sex is a good way to show between two people that they love each other. I enjoy sex to an extent. Though I do tend to lead to the "wait till you're married" type of deal even though I didn't. The first guy I had sex with I thought I loved him and that by haveing sex would make our relationship better (we were haveing a little problem at the time) So I stayed at his house and we had sex. I regret him takeing it. I honestly do wish I would of waited till I was married. Now I feel like a sex craze cause after you have it once you want it more and more. I haven't had sex in 11 months. I'm keeping myself again for the person I marry so it won't be another regret in the end. I hope atleast.

[Fat1Fared]

Love, don't do that, I mean by all means wait for a person who you really love, but like I have already said just because your married, it doesn't mean your perfectly in love now or anything, just means married

[loveistears]

yeah I know but when you're married you have more of a sense that you'll be together for a while ya know

[Kanariya674]

Love, don't do that, I mean by all means wait for a person who you really love, but like I have already said just because your married, it doesn't mean your perfectly in love now or anything, just means married

You're exactly right. People get married and end up separating later, but during that time there was nothing wrong to give themselves to their partner. They cared and loved them, and I think it's justified for them to have sex with them. I don't think it should be regrettable, even if the couple breaks up.

[redpheonix]

i agrees with ya, its just sad my friend lets call her Brittany, * not me i swears *, decided to meet a guy randomly after chatting to him to do the gnasty, and i did not know what to think about her, she was my best friend, and i dont care if she does the gnasty , i just wanted her to be smart about it. :( i still like her and stuff but......

[Turtlicious]

i agrees with ya, its just sad my friend lets call her Brittany, * not me i swears *, decided to meet a guy randomly after chatting to him to do the gnasty, and i did not know what to think about her, she was my best friend, and i dont care if she does the gnasty , i just wanted her to be smart about it. :( i still like her and stuff but......

...i just wish it was me i know im supposed to be serious but i just cant because of one main reason


1.) you can have sex without love making an emotion such as love evolutionarly useless meaning that any talk about it being wrong or dirty is pointless

[Apple]

naturally i am here (why didn't i come here sooner?)

Sex is something you need to be ready for, dont jump in so to speak. :v
Well thats my advice lol

[Danni I. Sullivan]

naturally i am here (why didn't i come here sooner?)


I was just thinking the same about myself.
xD

Be very cautious about having sex, you might end up like my oldest sister, she had three bastard children before she married the last one's father.
(Yes, they all had different fathers)

But Don't listen to me, I'm 15 and I came really close to going a little too far with a guy tonight.

[DaJacksterN]

HAH Danni you're one to talk!
*Shifty Eyes*
*Runs away*

[Danni I. Sullivan]

HAH Danni you're one to talk!
*Shifty Eyes*
*Runs away*

HOW DID I KNOW YOU'D SAY THAT?
XD

*catches you and drags you back to the bed*

[DaJacksterN]

HOW DID I KNOW YOU'D SAY THAT?
XD

*catches you and drags you back to the bed*

Because I am secretly a wizard!

*Jazz hands*

...

*GALLOPS away*

I'm tired, I dun wanna part-eh! xD

[Danni I. Sullivan]

Because I am secretly a wizard!

*Jazz hands*

...

*GALLOPS away*

I'm tired, I dun wanna part-eh! xD

But you MUST par-tay! It is important that you par-tay!

[Apple]

oooh can i join in? ;)

[Danni I. Sullivan]

Sure, there's always room for more!

[DaJacksterN]

YES INDEED.

[darkarcher]

Back on topic, people. This is supposed to be a serious discussion thread.

[Spoofs3]

Ok, Just to help lead the way back on track (Start a topic of it)

how serious do you guys TAKE sex?
Is it something like "Soul mate" only
Or do you treat it for people you are going our with,
Hell I don't mean to be rude in asking but does anyone actually believe its something to be enjoyed whenever and just goes out to get it with strangers (One night stands)

I for one would only give it to people I truly love (Not exclusively to GF/Wife but if single casual sex with great friends I've known for years)
I don't think it should be given out to anyone whom you've just met (Despite my personality)

[nikz]

It's funny that it's called the Birds and the Bees. If its suppose to be that the birds are the females and the bees are the males then it would appropriately fit the stereotypes that society holds for them. Fist of all the birds, most species of birds will chooses a mate and stay with them for there entire life ie they will have a life partner. This suits how society tends to hold females they are the ones that want to stay with there partner for life (alot of the time this isn't the case but hey i didn't create the stereotypes). Then we come to the Bees, one of the types of the male bees has the sole job of having sex with the queen as much as possible. This is reflected in the commonly held mantra that males are always 'in the mood'. Also There are alot of these types of bees inferring that the queen is slut. And again is reflected in society that men will always be attracted to sluttier girls.
However despite saying this every one is different some people do fit in to stereotypes some don't. Some people act like the birds and the bees some don't. At the end of the day you just have to work out whats best for you. You can get all the advice in the world but know one can tell you what decision to make when it comes to sex especially over a forum.
Just remember when was the last time you saw a couple of dolphins (who are the only other creatures to have sex for pleasure) getting married.

Note: This is not my personal view on the matter so please no personal attacks.

[OverMind]

It's funny that it's called the Birds and the Bees. [...]

That's a nifty interpretation, but the phrase has been around for a long time. You could further argue that the descriptions you've mentioned seem to be inherent in social structures throughout history.

On the other hand, I'm more inclined to think that it's all just a euphemism alluding to the naturalness of intercourse. We do it (representing mammals). The birds do it (avine reference). And the bees do it (insect reference). Note the juxtaposition of completely different species. Though life on earth is diverse, it shares the trait of reproductive capacity.

Just remember when was the last time you saw a couple of dolphins (who are the only other creatures to have sex for pleasure) getting married.

Incorrect. Many species engage in homosexual intercourse which, obviously, fails in producing offspring. So, then, why do they do it? Pleasure.

In the animal kingdom, marriage is used as an analogy for 'lifelong partner'. Obviously, they don't have marriage in the sense that we do.

1. Some species have members jumping from partner to partner.
2. Some species have members who couple up with a lifelong partner (as mentioned) even to the extreme that, if one dies, the other doesn't make any efforts to find a replacement.
3. Some species have members that die once the deed is done (Aren't you glad you aren't a male praying mantis?)

There's way more diversity than I've listed here. As far as I know, we tend to fit the mould of #1 and #2.

Note: This is not my personal view on the matter so please no personal attacks.

Whose view is this then? Did you happen to stumble upon it one day while taking a stroll through the park? An honest citizen would make the effort to return lost items to their original owners (i.e. go to a police station and turn in lost property).

[nikz]

Whose view is this then? Did you happen to stumble upon it one day while taking a stroll through the park? An honest citizen would make the effort to return lost items to their original owners (i.e. go to a police station and turn in lost property).
I was trying to take an (observing from the sideline) view on it. I dont relate every thing i do to the animal kingdom however in my job i learn alot of trivia so i though it may be appreciated if a shared some of the knowledge i had and not necessarily my own opinion (apart from that bit about people not doing what other people tell them to over a forum).
There is actually alot evidence that points towards other mammals having sex for pleasure but "apparently" it has only been proven that dolphins do and the rest are just following natural instinct. However my facts may and possibly are wrong.

In science it often happens that scientists say, 'You know that's a really good argument; my position is mistaken,' and then they actually change their minds and you never hear that old view from them again. They really do it. It doesn't happen as often as it should, because scientists are human and change is sometimes painful. But it happens every day. I cannot recall the last time something like that happened in politics or religion.

[OverMind]

In science it often happens that scientists say, 'You know that's a really good argument; my position is mistaken,' and then they actually change their minds and you never hear that old view from them again. They really do it. It doesn't happen as often as it should, because scientists are human and change is sometimes painful. But it happens every day. I cannot recall the last time something like that happened in politics or religion.

I just re-read what I wrote and it seems downright blunt when I was just really aiming for humour (i.e. You can't place an opinion in the Lost & Found box ... Get it ... It's not an object ... I'm a cavalcade of laughs, aren't I?).

As such, what is your personal view then? I'm under the impression that since you put a disclaimer, you disagree with the position presented in your own post.

[Apple]

no not really, it can be fun and enjoyable ;)

[Apple]

mmm the fun side ;)

[FanMan]

To get back to some seriousness. All I can say is that the idea of sex depends on each person. There is no right or wrong, just how each person views sex. Some view sex as fun and brings pleasure, while others view it as sacred, others see it as only for procreation and so on. The topic of sex is an out in the open or closed off in secrecy in our society and time. That's all I can say about the idea and have to offer.

[AdmiralAwesome]

Sex is an overthought concept

[Apple]

yeah just do it :p :p

[nikz]

As such, what is your personal view then? I'm under the impression that since you put a disclaimer, you disagree with the position presented in your own post.

Honestly my views on the matter change so much and ive had so many "real life" debates that the only conclusion ive come up with is that every one needs to figure out whats best for them and that no one should impose there beliefs upon any one else.

Oh and most of the people ive talked to about this all agree that the first time is a huge let down. But i think it wouldn't be if there wasn't such a huge hype about it every where you look.