[denim]

In this western culture, a lot of crud is folded into the concept of virginity. Why?

Virgins are "innocent", huh? Maybe in some sense. What they actually are is ignorant and inexperienced. They can be taken advantage of by others their age and otherwise, because they've not been trained on what to expect.

Sex education, starting at an early age like when kids start asking "where do babies come from" would be appropriate. When a kid asks this question, given that parents seem largely unwilling to really explain it clearly, and may be pretty darn ignorant themselves, he or she should be added to a group of his peers who have also asked it.

As a kid ages and becomes more interested in details, he or she should be given them. Period. No extra crap, no judgements about sex being "animal" or "dirty". It's not, even by religious standards: God created man and woman as they are, with their desires and their bodies. Declaring those things to be obscene strikes me as blasphemous.

So. Anyone here: have you never seen the opposite sex naked? I didn't say "appropriate", I said "opposite". If you're homosexual, it's not relevant to this discussion. Have you seen the opposite sex naked? How old were you, what was your reaction, and why did you react that way? Had you been told about the differences first? Were you curious, were you scared, were you upset? And why? After some answers to those questions, I'll continue.

[denim]

Originally posted by denim:
Have you seen the opposite sex naked? How old were you, what was your reaction, and why did you react that way? Had you been told about the differences first? Were you curious, were you scared, were you upset? And why? After some answers to those questions, I'll continue.

To be fair, I should start.

1) Have I seen the opposite sex naked?
Yes. I was 5. She was a next-door neighbor my age.
2) I was curious. I instigated the incident with some planning.
3) At that point, no one had said much to me about sex, so I had nothing but curiousity to motivate me. There was something different about girls, but I hadn't seen it, so I did what I could to find out. The girl got a little upset, though.

[Demonhood]

since when did the term virgin also imply that the individual was ignorant and uneducated in all things sexual? a kid can be given the details and information about sex being a healthy & natural thing and still choose not to go out and have sex right away (thereby still being a virgin). if you didn't mean to imply this, please clarify.

[denim]

Originally posted by Demonhood:
since when did the term virgin also imply that the individual was ignorant and uneducated in all things sexual? a kid can be given the details and information about sex being a healthy & natural thing and still choose not to go out and have sex right away (thereby still being a virgin). if you didn't mean to imply this, please clarify.

Yes, that can happen. That's my point. I have to make my case, though. So let's talk about the general case in this country, starting with some data.

[G4ME]

you tell him hood, defend your self


Hehehe

[Phanguye]

this topic is just about ghey

[thePurpleGiant]

Okay, I'll share, got nothing to hide

Hmm, what were the questions again? <scrolls down>

(Rest of page hasn't loaded, damn 56kb modem downloading the 50mb system update)

Oh, the first time I saw the opposite sex naked, I was 15. My first girlfriend, I wasn't really sure what to expect from our first 'date'. Basically I kissed her at the movies, then we went to her place, and she said 'would you like to take off my bra?' And it kind of went from there until she was completely naked. I was damn happy, but I suppose a little disappointed, I mean she's naked, now what? lol...yeah, uh, next please...

[Cipher13]

Originally posted by thePurpleGiant:
I mean she's naked, now what?

Did you need a written invitation?

[G4ME]

you aussies always seem to amaze me

[RGB]

Originally posted by G4ME:
you aussies always seem to amaze me

So people int he country down under don't go down? How ironic.

[denim]

Originally posted by Cipher13:
Did you need a written invitation?

At that age? Quite likely. If he'd never seen a woman before, had no clue of how they act (and who does at 40, let alone 15), had no practical instruction on how to deal with the situation, and hadn't really thought about it himself earlier, why would you be surprised at the clueless response?

I had similar situations when I was 21 and 25. When I was 25, she was a bit more explicit, and I got a clue, without going into detail.

We get social training on most everything but sex. Then we act like people with no clue about how to handle sex are somehow deficent!

[Millennium]

Tell me again why virginity is something to be ashamed of, as you seem to be implying? As for your questions:

1) You are oversimplifying. Do you mean only seeing a person up close? Do pictures count? What about movies? Regardless, I was in first grade at the time; a friend of mine and I stumbled across something on TV completely by accident.

2) Reaction? We both laughed. I'm not entirely certain why, to be honest; it was a long time ago, after all. After that I had basically no voice for two days, and when I got it back my voice had changed. I kid you not. Probably just a freak coincidence, but an impressive one nevertheless.

3) Told? Not told, per se. But when one has sisters, it's impossible to not come across the differences, sooner or later. So yes, I was aware.

4) My feelings on the matter? To be honest, I don't remember them. You'll remember that, as I said, I was quite young; my memory isn't showing me anything.

I think a decent sex-ed program is a Good Thing. We don't have one, as it is; while current programs do a fairly decent job about teaching the mechanics, they completely leave out the emotional side of things. Whether they're ignoring it or avoiding it, I can't be sure.

Am I a virgin? Yes, I am. I'll continue to be one until I'm married (which, to be fair, is not far off; six months). And frankly, I'm proud of that.

Bush's abstinence-only idea is a bad one. But the current systems, which teach abstinence as a nonoption and basically push kids into sexual relationships at a time when their bodies may be capable but their minds certainly are not (and don't even bother warning them of this), are just as bad. Of course, the media has its own share in the blame, as do parents who don't bother teaching these things.

But no culture which treats either virginity or the lack thereof as something to be ashamed of has it right. And frankly, just about every culture out there has either one or the other of these problems at the moment. In this particular area, denim, you're showing yourself to be little better than the abstinence-only zealots.

[denim]

Originally posted by Millennium:
Tell me again why virginity is something to be ashamed of, as you seem to be implying?

IMHO, a virgin brings very little to bed. An experienced partner, OTGH, is a whole 'nother situation.

As for your questions:

1) You are oversimplifying. Do you mean only seeing a person up close? Do pictures count? What about movies? Regardless, I was in first grade at the time; a friend of mine and I stumbled across something on TV completely by accident.

You're right, I'm not being specific. Okay, let's make that seeing a naked person of the opposite sex in real life, no pictures or video allowed, though I could go the other way, I guess.

2) Reaction? We both laughed. I'm not entirely certain why, to be honest; it was a long time ago, after all. After that I had basically no voice for two days, and when I got it back my voice had changed. I kid you not. Probably just a freak coincidence, but an impressive one nevertheless.

Yeah, I'd say so: seeing a naked woman made you a man!

3) Told? Not told, per se. But when one has sisters, it's impossible to not come across the differences, sooner or later. So yes, I was aware.

Fair enough.

4) My feelings on the matter? To be honest, I don't remember them. You'll remember that, as I said, I was quite young; my memory isn't showing me anything.

I've heard that, at least before massive media barages of sex-related stuff, before Playboy and such, such exposure could frighten kids. I don't know if it's still true; that's why I'm asking.

I think a decent sex-ed program is a Good Thing. We don't have one, as it is; while current programs do a fairly decent job about teaching the mechanics, they completely leave out the emotional side of things.

And I consider that to be a major problem. Not only do kids not really get a good age-appropriate explaination, but they also get no hint as to the emotional impact, or any kind of information about technique. "HOW TO" would, it seems to me, be useful for a lot of newbies. I suspect an open discussion in a mixed-sex group on this topic would be fascinating: how do you do these things, what do you look for, etc. What do you know that I've not encountered yet, and the reverse? etcetera. Why isn't this talked about anywhere, as it's of general interest.

Am I a virgin? Yes, I am. I'll continue to be one until I'm married (which, to be fair, is not far off; six months). And frankly, I'm proud of that.

Why are you proud of being a virgin? I'm honestly curious.

But the current systems, which teach abstinence as a nonoption and basically push kids into sexual relationships at a time when their bodies may be capable but their minds certainly are not (and don't even bother warning them of this), are just as bad.

Sure, no question.

But no culture which treats either virginity or the lack thereof as something to be ashamed of has it right.

I don't think of it as something to be ashamed of, precisely, but I see it as something with less than zero value. I can see, until you answer my "Why?", above, that you don't agree, but I'd really like to understand your position.

And frankly, just about every culture out there has either one or the other of these problems at the moment. In this particular area, denim, you're showing yourself to be little better than the abstinence-only zealots.

I don't currently see it. I see virginity as a state of total ignorance. Careful experience beats the heck out of it.

[ringo]

Originally posted by denim:
How old were you, what was your reaction, and why did you react that way?
Had you been told about the differences first?
Were you curious, were you scared, were you upset? And why?

6, in a diagram from a medical book...later 12, in an issue of Playboy that my Stepfather stashed away in my room where he knew I would find it. At 6 I was interested, at 12 aroused. I knew there was a difference, but didn't have a visual beforehand.

RE: Virgins and experience...I did extensive research before my first sexual experience, mostly in the way of Penthouse Forums and a Sex manual my parents had under their bed. Happy to say that I not only knew what do do, but had some idea about the best way do it when the time finally came. The manual covered safe sex as well, so I think I was pretty well informed.

[denim]

Originally posted by ringo:

6, in a diagram from a medical book...later 12, in an issue of Playboy that my Stepfather stashed away in my room where he knew I would find it. At 6 I was interested, at 12 aroused. I knew there was a difference, but didn't have a visual beforehand.

Similar to my own experience. I simply added girls my own age to those sources when I was between the ages of 5..10.

RE: Virgins and experience...I did extensive research before my first sexual experience, mostly in the way of Penthouse Forums and a Sex manual my parents had under their bed. Happy to say that I not only knew what do do, but had some idea about the best way do it when the time finally came. The manual covered safe sex as well, so I think I was pretty well informed.

Sounds that way, yeah. I wonder how many others have used these aids before their first experience. I did, fer sure. Even so, you've got to admit that there's a bit of difference between the theory and the practice.

[ringo]

Originally posted by denim:
Even so, you've got to admit that there's a bit of difference between the theory and the practice.

Absolutely! But unless we make some drastic changes to sex-ed, that will always be the case.

[denim]

Originally posted by ringo:
that will always be the case.

God, I hope it's not always the case! If people were to get good instruction along with tutoring in a controlled environment, I've got to figure that the results would be "cleaner", if you will, than the randomness we have now.

[denim]

oops, deleted.

[ringo]

Tutoring? Are you suggesting that we start introducing prostitutes into the sex-ed process? I'm not sure I understand.

[denim]

Originally posted by ringo:
Tutoring? Are you suggesting that we start introducing prostitutes into the sex-ed process? I'm not sure I understand.

Depends on how you define "prostitute". Someone trained in this kind of thing, hired to do it as a career for a school system, strikes me as a teacher of some sort, not as a prostitute.

One interesting issue would be how many kids would learn their real orientation from this orientation class.

This is not something we can do any time soon, as it requires a lot of maturation of society before it will be accepted, let alone expected.

[thunderous_funker]

I'm not sure you can continue to talk about sex-ed and what it should and shouldn't be without deciding on what sex "means".

Right now, it's treated as reproduction. Kids are taught the biology of reproduction. The only social or value element is when they start talking about protection from unwanted pregnancy and STD's. Even that is fairly value neutral--it's just technical information associated with the physical act of reproduction.

Denim, you seem to be advocating some extension or shift in sex-ed that would include the social aspects of dealing with one's sexuality. That has almost NOTHING to do with reproduction or biology and everything to do with self-image, social values, psychology, relationships and interaction, etc etc.

My feeling is that something like that can ONLY be taught outside of public education. It's far to subjective and value-specific to be adaptable to a formal curriculum, IMO.

It should most certainly be taught and it's a damn shame why so many kids never learn it from the people who love them and should be helping them cope with all of this. That, of course, is a whole other topic, IMO, and has more to do with culture than anything else.

Regarding your questions about nudity and the opposite sex, I have a strong opinion on the matter. I think Americans tend to associate nudity with sex whereas most Europeans do not. For example, Germans think swimsuits for children are stupid. Why have your kid running around in wet clothes so they can catch cold? Most children under 5 (and sometimes older) are completely naked at public swimming pools or beaches. For that reason, the tend to have a completely different sense of body consciousness than most Americans. Fat Germans think nothing of wearing a skimpy speedo or bikini. They don't have many of the same body hang ups that Americans do. They don't associate nudity with sex. The body is just a body and being naked isn't akin to arousal or sexual advances.

[iNub]

Most soccer moms get disgusted at the idea that their child will be going to a regular sex ed class ("This is a penis, this is what it does. This is a vagina, this is what it does." No real mention of sex, aside from the fact that you can get pregnant.).

I can just see it now. "Group of 40 soccer moms massacre school board. Details at eleven." Yeah, it would require a lot of maturation in our society. While we sit down in the living room on a couch (made of toxic foam that doesn't decompose when you throw the couch away) with our "wholesome" microwave (that uses an ungodly amount of electricity) dinner (that has more fat content that a week's worth of real food, and less nutritional value) and watch our violence and propaganda-filled family television shows.

Killing is more politically correct than ****ing. I've always thought that was funny.

[denim]

Originally posted by thunderous_funker:
Denim, you seem to be advocating some extension or shift in sex-ed that would include the social aspects of dealing with one's sexuality. That has almost NOTHING to do with reproduction or biology and everything to do with self-image, social values, psychology, relationships and interaction, etc etc.

Good, I've been clear.

My feeling is that something like that can ONLY be taught outside of public education. It's far to subjective and value-specific to be adaptable to a formal curriculum, IMO.

If not the schools, where would you suggest? College won't do because not enough people go to it. Anyway, the younger you start something like this, the better. IMO.

It should most certainly be taught and it's a damn shame why so many kids never learn it from the people who love them and should be helping them cope with all of this. That, of course, is a whole other topic, IMO, and has more to do with culture than anything else.

We're on the same page. I've been ranting about this for the last few days in the Lounge.

This is a very sick society, and nowhere more so than in its attitude about the human body and that body's normal functions. Victorian and Puritan culture needs to be expunged completely, and replaced by... what?

Regarding your questions about nudity and the opposite sex, I have a strong opinion on the matter. I think Americans tend to associate nudity with sex whereas most Europeans do not.

Has to do with their programming. The few times the topic is brought up, it's generally attached to Thou Shalt Nots related to sex. Nudists, and children of nudists, are probably much more healthy about the topic, but I don't know any to speak to about this.

Even so, discussion of technique and such is probably (probably!) more than even nudists get into with their kids. I wouldn't know for sure.

For example, Germans think swimsuits for children are stupid. Why have your kid running around in wet clothes so they can catch cold? Most children under 5 (and sometimes older) are completely naked at public swimming pools or beaches. For that reason, the tend to have a completely different sense of body consciousness than most Americans.

Even for adults, swimwear is silly.

Fat Germans think nothing of wearing a skimpy speedo or bikini. They don't have many of the same body hang ups that Americans do.

This is one hangup I've got: I won't go swimming in public until I get my body into something I can honestly say I would be willing to be seen in.

Note that in private with close friends is another story entirely, but such friends are very rare.

They don't associate nudity with sex. The body is just a body and being naked isn't akin to arousal or sexual advances.

Healthy attitude, no?

[denim]

Originally posted by iNub:
Killing is more politically correct than ****ing. I've always thought that was funny.

Sad, I'd say.

What there needs to be is a way to make healthy eating and healthy attitudes toward the human body, profitable. That happens, and McDonalds et al will have a hard time surviving unless they adapt.

[thunderous_funker]

Originally posted by denim:
If not the schools, where would you suggest? College won't do because not enough people go to it.

I don't think it can be done in the public sphere. Sadly, it's a private matter and must be kept so. There certainly are enough self-help books, therapy groups, therapists, etc to facilitate the curious.

Originally posted by denim:
Even for adults, swimwear is silly.


Healthy attitude, no?

I agree. I don't own a swimsuit. Then again, I don't like pools either. I prefer to swim in natural bodies of water and I don't like crowds

I mentioned the Germain attitude towards children's nudity to illustrate what I consider to be a very healthy attitude. Yes.

In Victorian times, children's nudity was also considered quite normal even in photographs. Children were innocent and there was nothing sexual about it. In fact, Lewis Carroll was a brilliant amateur photographer who specialized in capturing children. When photos were found of naked youngsters, it raised questions of pedophilia amoung some critics (still does in some circles). The accussation is quite absurd and reflects how the base can often project their own depravity on the innocence of others.

[denim]

Originally posted by thunderous_funker:
In Victorian times, children's nudity was also considered quite normal even in photographs. Children were innocent and there was nothing sexual about it. In fact, Lewis Carroll was a brilliant amateur photographer who specialized in capturing children. When photos were found of naked youngsters, it raised questions of pedophilia amoung some critics (still does in some circles). The accussation is quite absurd and reflects how the base can often project their own depravity on the innocence of others.

They also used to take pictures of corpses at their funerals. They were playing with what was to them a new technology. That's not to say they took no erotic photographs! Not even close: they took lots of nude and erotic pictures. Might be interesting to come up with a history of such things. I'm sure it exists, as it's too obvious a topic to not have been done in book form at some point. I'll have to do a search.

But back on topic. I'm really interested in the answer I'm waiting for from Millenium on "Why he feels proud to maintain virginity". Perhaps he's trying to figure it out himself.

[beb]

Yes, the underappreciation and certainly the virtues of virginity are lost in America. As I write these words, a movie "The Longest Day" is playing in the background. It's a fairly violent film. I remember my grandmother telling about how she arrived in Europe on D-Day plus twenty and there were still bodies on the beach.

America is a country that is bred on violence, mayhem and distruction. This is even more evident when a north Hollywood passerby upon seeing one of the two planes fly into the World Trade Center asked "What visual effects company did that?" Or that Cops or Shock Video or similar shows encapsulate or push into our tv tube-watching faces only the most intense parts of the human experience.

Old folks thought nothing of telling me what they went through in World War II, and some of my friends dads have told me about their experiences in Vietnam. As if as a teenager, I was somehow prepared to deal with that information. As our culture deals with more and more violent videogames such as GTA Vice City -which my neighbor's eight year old son plays far better than I do. I wonder what kind of culture we're trying to create here.

Insofar as sex goes, it's mosly a byproduct of violent American culture. As I'm sure my neighbor would say, "God forbid my son see a nipple or whatever, but hell yeah let him blast the crap out of any black-hat-wearing-osama-bin-landen-al-quacka-saddam-insane pixel based video villian he or she wants." By joe, it's even a protected bear-arms right.

I don't know, maybe it's that abilty to easily resort to violence to solve problems that has made America (ahem) such a great country.

Jeez, this is hysterical, John Wayne in France.

[undotwa]

This is a bad idea IMHO.

It must be taught by the parents, and while they are going into puberty.

Otherwise the kids treat the entire thing as a joke. They think of the process as 'sick', they start making stupid jokes... etc... like 'lets have sex!'.

There is nothing wrong with virginity. I have no idea where people get the idea that there is something wrong with it.

[elzinat]

Originally posted by thunderous_funker:
I don't think it can be done in the public sphere. Sadly, it's a private matter and must be kept so. There certainly are enough self-help books, therapy groups, therapists, etc to facilitate the curious.

This has significant problems associated with it, specifically, that it then requires the "immature" or "maturing" individual to him/herself make the leap from the private discussion with parents/reading books/whatever into the public sphere. This is HARD. Imagine trying to start talking with someone about something which you have never heard anyone talking about before. There are a number of things like that i've at some time wanted (more than anything else in the world) to talk to someone about, and not been able to. Am I just exceptionally meek? maybe. but i'm inclined to believe that most people have a lot of things they'd like to talk about but don't know how, or are too scared because they don't have any framework in which to share with others.
I think what denim is really trying to get at is a normalization of sexual socialization. There is no way to prepare people for the emotional changes they may go through beforehand. The best way to help people to deal with these changes is to establish a framework in which they will be able to mutually interactively explore their development with others. when individuals are placed in a context where they have to act without a real model to follow, weird stuff happens. and that's how the kind of confused screwed up social patterns of our society's youth develop. it's not a good thing.

the book Brave New World had a very interesting model of sexual socialization. while not all of it seems good � one side effect of their system is a loss of meaning to emotional relationships , and like all else in that society it is imposed more... "strongly" than some might think appropriate� there are some things about the system worth really thinking about. normalizing education (of all sorts) is what keeps people from getting "weird."

[Atef's corpse]

Originally posted by beb:
America is a country that is bred on violence, mayhem and distruction.

I don't know, maybe it's that abilty to easily resort to violence to solve problems that has made America (ahem) such a great country.

yak yak yak yak! Such bullcrap. If these movies weren't popular in your country, they wouldn't show them on the tele. In fact, French movies are so unpopular in FRANCE that the government tells theatres they have to show a certain number of French movies. Pathetic. It's not America's fault that your socialism can't protect your country against what its own citizens want to watch. Look in the mirror next time you want to bitch and moan.

How about America being bred on heroism and virtues? You know how many movies the US pumps out, yet you judge it and its people--people that have done more for freedom in the world than whatever rathole you come from--based on the basest of the lot. Movies like Superman, the goonies, and many, many others show heroism, good versus evil (with good winning), success, virtue, character, and honesty. Many Americans grow up with those values. So shut your ignorant and biased hole. Next time you sit in bed, wondering why your own country is weak and insignificant, think about the values that most real Americans have--honesty, valour, and most important of all, the will to fight when fighting is necessary--and you will have your answer. The power and success of America comes from its people. After all, most came here to escape Europe. the US is the world's rabble, and perhaps that's what really gets your goat: a people, given opportunity, freedom, and values, can achieve so much in so little time.

[denim]

Originally posted by undotwa:
It must be taught by the parents, and while they are going into puberty.

Yes, the "let's not really think about this" response "let's just answer what we're used to, what've been programmed to" response. Think, damn it: tell me why it should be that way, not just that it should be.

Otherwise the kids treat the entire thing as a joke. They think of the process as 'sick', they start making stupid jokes... etc... like 'lets have sex!'.

Existing programming, yes. Nervousness and unease about the topic, also.

There is nothing wrong with virginity.

Never said there was something wrong per se with it, just that it's useless, at best.

[deekay1]

Originally posted by Demonhood:
a kid can be given the details and information about sex being a healthy & natural thing and still choose not to go out and have sex right away (thereby still being a virgin).

i completely agree with you on that.

but what's really f�cked up, is if people start PREACHING abstinence.

[tooki]

My sister is just 18 months younger than I am, so it made a lot of sense for my parents to bathe us together, so while I can't say that I remember at what precise age I first saw a naked female, it was certainly quite young (probably when I was 18 months old, I guess). Also, when we were very little, we young'uns would just bathe with mom and dad. So I guess I was pretty young the first time I saw a naked adult, too.

Either way, at that age, it's not like any of it did anything for me.


As for nudity and how we perceive it: I find it to be a rather curious perversion of "morals" that it somehow is "perverted" to see the naked human form. Most high cultures throughout history (ancient Egypt, Rome and Greece, for example) held the human form to be the epitome of perfection, to be beheld as a thing of beauty, not an icon of the perverted.

I tend to agree with the European view of nakedness as nothing special.

As for sex ed: here in the U.S., the conservatives consider any explanation of how sex works to be promotion of it. The other side (to which I belong) maintain that some kids are gonna have sex no matter what we tell them, so as least let's make sure they know how to do it safely so you don't have to find out that your 16-year old kid got HIV (or any other STD) from someone, or that your child has become, or caused someone else to get, pregnant.

tooki

[Millennium]

Originally posted by denim:
IMHO, a virgin brings very little to bed. An experienced partner, OTGH, is a whole 'nother situation.

It would be a grave mistake to think me ignorant or inexperienced, simply because I have chosen not to have sex by the most common definitions of the term.

Yeah, I'd say so: seeing a naked woman made you a man!

Except that I didn't go through puberty until several years after that happened, and when I finally did, my voice did not change a second time.

Not only do kids not really get a good age-appropriate explaination, but they also get no hint as to the emotional impact, or any kind of information about technique. "HOW TO" would, it seems to me, be useful for a lot of newbies. I suspect an open discussion in a mixed-sex group on this topic would be fascinating: how do you do these things, what do you look for, etc. What do you know that I've not encountered yet, and the reverse? etcetera. Why isn't this talked about anywhere, as it's of general interest.

As I understand it, women are actually much more open amongst themselves about this sort of thing. Why men aren't, I don't know. And a mixed-company discussion could certainly be useful.

But to discuss it that young? I don't know. The problem is, especially among males, the body becomes capable of having sex long before the mind becomes capable of dealing with the emotional and physical consequences of it. I mean, once puberty hits it's impossible to avoid explaining a few things -to hold certain things back at that point would simply be cruel- but should one start learning technique when their minds aren't yet capable of handling the situations when such technique would be applied? One does nothing but incite curiosity in that case, and that can have disastrous consequences.

Why are you proud of being a virgin? I'm honestly curious.

I consider it an accomplishment. For some time now, I could have reversed that condition at practically any time I wanted. I haven't, for a variety of reasons, but it has been my choice. And it hasn't always been an easy choice, I will admit. But I have stuck through it. There's some pride to be had in that, I think.

I don't currently see it. I see virginity as a state of total ignorance. Careful experience beats the heck out of it.

It's only ignorance if one allows it to be, whether that is through lack of motivation, lack of creativity, or lack of understanding.

[denim]

Originally posted by Millennium:
It would be a grave mistake to think me ignorant or inexperienced, simply because I have chosen not to have sex by the most common definitions of the term.

Ah, the truth comes out.

Except that I didn't go through puberty until several years after that happened, and when I finally did, my voice did not change a second time.

Perhaps only that part changed at the time, then.

But to discuss it that young?

I did say "age-approprate". Talking about technique and such with pre-pubescent children is probably pointless, but talking with them about the physical differences and the possible results, with the way it can affect their lives, seems as likely to help as discussing drugs with them at such an age. At least, IMO.

I don't know. The problem is, especially among males, the body becomes capable of having sex long before the mind becomes capable of dealing with the emotional and physical consequences of it.

Girls hit puberty before guys. You think it's different in that way for them? Granted, their biological imperative is different, but I don't think they're exactly uninterested in the idea...

I mean, once puberty hits it's impossible to avoid explaining a few things -to hold certain things back at that point would simply be cruel-

It seems to me that it's already a bit too late. Explaining gravity to a kid who has already spilled milk doesn't prevent anything, or prepare the kid for what can happen.

but should one start learning technique when their minds aren't yet capable of handling the situations when such technique would be applied? One does nothing but incite curiosity in that case, and that can have disastrous consequences.

Maybe, but it seems to me that if you've already laid (as it were) the groundwork by indoctrinating the child as to the possible results, that curiousity may be seriously tempered by caution.

I consider it an accomplishment.

I understand that. Showing yourself that you have the willpower is good. Wish I could do the same with food! I already did it with sex.

That's not to say that I haven't had premarital sex! What it's to say is that I refused naked women who didn't happen to fit my criteria. If she's not Jewish, I'm not interested. There have been a couple of goyish women to whom I was seriously attracted, even got so far as my hand in their privates, but then turned back. When it came down to it, they weren't Jewish, and that's one Mitzvah I'm planning to maintain: marry a Jewish woman. And I do consider penetration to be a form of marriage, you won't get me to argue that one. I consider there to be a permanent link between me and the women I've had. It's something I've never mentioned to them, or acted on.

For some time now, I could have reversed that condition at practically any time I wanted. I haven't, for a variety of reasons, but it has been my choice. And it hasn't always been an easy choice, I will admit. But I have stuck through it. There's some pride to be had in that, I think.

No argument. But being proud of "virginity" as such in itself, seems silly to me except as proof that you were able to impose your will on your body, not as a good thing in itself.

It's only ignorance if one allows it to be, whether that is through lack of motivation, lack of creativity, or lack of understanding.

You'll find out. I won't try to explain it to you until afterwards, when you'll already know. Far be it from me to try to explain the wonder of a rainbow to a man blind from birth!

[Millennium]

Originally posted by denim:
Ah, the truth comes out.

What "truth"? I'm not trying to play the lawyer here. I have run across many definitions of sex in my lifetime; some include only intercourse, others include oral sex, and so on. I have done nothing which fits any of these definitions. Even my own. I could go into a long and graphic history of the things I have done -though I don't care to do that- and no one would question my virginity even after hearing it. That does not, however, mean that I'm an asexual being, nor that I am ignorant or unskilled.

But even if I were unskilled, what of that? Is not half the joy in intimacy in the learning, in the slowly coming to understand the needs of one's partner as well as one's own? While just sort of automatically knowing what to do may be a pleasant thing in the short term, it reduces intimacy to just sort of going through the motions, rather than building closeness through learning and understanding.

Perhaps only that part changed at the time, then.

Possibly, but that would be quite unusual, to have one aspect change, then nothing happen for several years, and then have everything else catch up simultaneously. Either way, a freak coincidence.

Girls hit puberty before guys. You think it's different in that way for them? Granted, their biological imperative is different, but I don't think they're exactly uninterested in the idea...

Oh, I never said that. But boys mature more slowly mentally, as well as physically (the mere existence of The Man Show rather proves my point). Women tend to mature faster in both aspects. But for reasons which are still not well-understood, girls (particularly in the US but also elsewhere) have been hitting puberty sooner and sooner as time has progressed, to the point where nowadays where it's still rare but not unheard of for girls to hit puberty at eight years of age. So the problem does still exist for them.

It seems to me that it's already a bit too late. Explaining gravity to a kid who has already spilled milk doesn't prevent anything, or prepare the kid for what can happen.

True, but I don't think your analogy holds. What you're talking about sounds more like talking about sex to a kid who has already had sex. That's not what I am saying. I am saying that holding back information from someone whose body is already undergoing puberty is cruel, because they should at least know what is going on. But, even at the age where kids are physically maturing, to have the mental maturity to handle actually having sex is almost unheard of.

Maybe, but it seems to me that if you've already laid (as it were) the groundwork by indoctrinating the child as to the possible results, that curiousity may be seriously tempered by caution.

Interesting; I wouldn't think you'd have used the term "indoctrinate" to describe your own viewpoint. Suffice it to say I agree with your usage of the term, though I understand it in a much more negative sense than you probably do.

You'll find out. I won't try to explain it to you until afterwards, when you'll already know. Far be it from me to try to explain the wonder of a rainbow to a man blind from birth!

Perhaps. Perhaps not.

But you know what? I'm more than willing to bet it's not all the media makes it out to be. Nice? Hell yes; extremely nice, no doubt. But something interesting I've seen in the media: people are always out to get more sex, or better sex; they're never really satisfied with it. And I think it's at least in part because we've built up this grand mythical expectation -one which you are helping to perpetuate- which no one ever sees fulfilled. And it leaves us feeling empty and unsatisfied.

[Mulattabianca]

i dont remember how small i was when i first realised the differences between the sexes. probably under 3. sex education then.. some, nearly nothing, at school, by some 40 y old women who were red and ashamed while talking about the subject at all. at home .. less than nothing. i avoided the topic untill i was over 20, or at least doing anything about it. so i was ignorant? maybe everything has its reasons.

[denim]

Originally posted by Millennium:
But even if I were unskilled, what of that? Is not half the joy in intimacy in the learning, in the slowly coming to understand the needs of one's partner as well as one's own? While just sort of automatically knowing what to do may be a pleasant thing in the short term, it reduces intimacy to just sort of going through the motions, rather than building closeness through learning and understanding.

There's at least two kinds of knowledge of this sort: the generic stuff (what does everyone want, what does every woman want), and the specific (what does this woman want). You can get the former out of books and such. Knowing it will help you bond to a woman, but it won't do it all. And every woman is different. What pleases your mate rather than another woman you might encounter. That is the part you have to learn for each woman. Knowing the generic stuff helps you get to the specific stuff. And the generic stuff is teachable. Or you can get it from the parallax view you get from trying your skills with more than one woman, and comparing what you did.

Possibly, but that would be quite unusual, to have one aspect change, then nothing happen for several years, and then have everything else catch up simultaneously. Either way, a freak coincidence.

I doubt you're a freak, but okay.

Oh, I never said that. But boys mature more slowly mentally, as well as physically (the mere existence of The Man Show rather proves my point).

NO argument!!

True, but I don't think your analogy holds. What you're talking about sounds more like talking about sex to a kid who has already had sex.

Probably does sound that way, but that's not what I meant. I meant to say that explaining what's already happened once a kid's body has started changing is being a bit late off the mark. Preparation is better.

Interesting; I wouldn't think you'd have used the term "indoctrinate" to describe your own viewpoint. Suffice it to say I agree with your usage of the term, though I understand it in a much more negative sense than you probably do.

I say it as I see it. We're all indoctrinated, whether we see it that way or not. Social training, for a particular society, is indoctrination. The doctrine in this case is related to things like the Ten Commandments, monogamy, etc. You can't deny it and have me take you seriously.

But you know what? I'm more than willing to bet it's not all the media makes it out to be.

Of course. The media exaggerates to sell papers. Or maybe I've just not encountered a woman yet who was particularly good at it. I suspect there are other issues that impinge on this which I've not been given time to experience, which would heterodyne to make the sex better.

And it leaves us feeling empty and unsatisfied.

That's sideways. What I'm saying is unrelated to the media, as their message is more to sell papers than to get "truth" across. They're as indoctrinated as most everyone else is about this.

What I'm talking about has less to do with what is and suggest some changes to improve it. Attacking me isn't going to change that.

[suhail]

I am on Millennium's side, I wish if I had done the same.

[denim]

Originally posted by suhail:
I am on Millennium's side, I wish if I had done the same.

Why? Was your first experience bad?

[ollio]

Originally posted by Atef's corpse:

How about America being bred on heroism and virtues? You know how many movies the US pumps out, yet you judge it and its people--people that have done more for freedom in the world than whatever rathole you come from--based on the basest of the lot.

hehe rofl , and this in a virginity thread

[JacenSolo]

Originally posted by ollio:
hehe rofl , and this in a virginity thread

I LIKE TO HAVE SEX AND MAKE BABIES, AT THE SAME TIME

[wdlove]

Its the sex with the one that you that's important. Having a baby is a gift from God!

[denim]

We were talking about virginity and the shedding of it, not about reproduction.

[InterfaceGuy]

Originally posted by denim:
We were talking about virginity and the shedding of it, not about reproduction.

Mesa thinks YOU have some issues. But, I'm not a professional psychologist so what do I know.

I am a virgin and am proud to be so. My reason is my faith. I am a Christian and it is my belief that you should remain a virgin until marriage. This idea/rule/law was set before us by God not so that he could be mean and be telling us what to do, but to help us. By having sexual relations outside of marriage, you open yourself up to disease and later regret that could harm the marriage. Just my 2 cents...

[Angus_D]

Originally posted by Millennium:
I consider it an accomplishment. For some time now, I could have reversed that condition at practically any time I wanted. I haven't, for a variety of reasons, but it has been my choice. And it hasn't always been an easy choice, I will admit. But I have stuck through it. There's some pride to be had in that, I think.

Well good for you, Millennium! Standing up for your values and not just letting yourself be thrown in the direction society wants you to go is always a good thing, if not an easy one.

Originally posted by InterfaceGuy:
I am a virgin and am proud to be so. My reason is my faith. I am a Christian and it is my belief that you should remain a virgin until marriage. This idea/rule/law was set before us by God not so that he could be mean and be telling us what to do, but to help us. By having sexual relations outside of marriage, you open yourself up to disease and later regret that could harm the marriage. Just my 2 cents...

Let's not let this turn into a religious flamewar, eh? You just can't apply things like "it's bad because God says so" to an adult discussion about topics like this in today's society, whether you like it or not. My personal belief is that anybody who blindly believes what their religion tells them (without thinking about issues for themselves) is the one in need of psychiatric help, but hey, that's just me.

[denim]

Originally posted by Angus_D:
My personal belief is that anybody who blindly believes what their religion tells them (without thinking about issues for themselves) is the one in need of psychiatric help, but hey, that's just me.

I wouldn't go that far, but I do know that some people fall back on religious dictates because they can't, or won't, think for themselves. <shrug>

[Zimphire]

Most Christians ARE Christians because they think for themselves. People who listen and follow Society are the ones that are usually brain dead.

[PorscheBunny]

Originally posted by denim:
I wouldn't go that far, but I do know that some people fall back on religious dictates because they can't, or won't, think for themselves. <shrug>

Gee, that doesn't apply to anyone in this forum, does it?

[BigDaddyReece]

Here is my reply to you as a fundamentalist born-again Christian. First and foremost I did not grow up in a Christian home and pretty much without a fatherly figure to teach how things were suppost to be. Unfortunately, I learned some really bad habits and from the age of 9 had developed an addiction to pornography. However, I have remained a virgin, I cannot deny my desire to have sex with someone because it is a desire that is natural designed by Almighty God. Even in the book of Genesis God states that is not good for man to be alone, therefore God created a help-mate to be with Him, then God called it good. Now, fast forward to the time of Moses when God sends calls Moses to the Mountain, and writes the Ten Commandments, God wrote that man shall not commit adultery. Fastforward again, to the time of Jesus Christ's teaching (whom by the way is fully God and fully man) and He taught that if a man even looks at a woman lustfully he has committed adultery with her in his heart. Now, personally for me, this is from the lips of perfect Holiness in whom is no sin. And everything He spoke while on earth was from His Father, God!
Furthermore, there are other boudaries that God set for instance, in Scripture it says that when a man and a woman are joined together via sexual intercourse that they become one, that is why when women have sex to a man they become very attatched, again I say this is the truth because it came from the lips of Christ. That when two are joined together they become one flesh. Moreover, they are part of one another. Because I have never had sex I cannot know this feeling, but I believe because friends have told me there is this togetherness that they feel. Now, someday I hope to marry and have kids, and I can only hope that my wife would have waited for me as I have her, but I will not condemn her if she has, I am as a Christian commanded to forgive. You are saying that we need experience, here is my reply to that: I plan on being with my wife until death do us part, now unfortunately because of my years in porn, I know how things work. I know I may not be at first the greatest sex partner someone would want if she was experienced, but I believe over our years together as husband and wife I will get better. Now, you also said that we sometimes hear about people beatin around the bush about telling their kids about sex, personally I will start them at an early age telling them the TRUTH about sex and its complications. I will also teach them from a Christian worldview on how God desires for humans to interact with one another basis sexually. Furthermore, there ought to be sex-ed, but teach abstinence in the public schools as a form of contraceptive. Now, also teach how two people interact, but I don't want the teaching to be so gruesome that it leads my child into the Hell of pornography addiction as I have went through. I believe that for myself I am a selfish inconsiderate moron, if I go out having sex with every girl I meet, (by the way, I ain't some ugly homeboy!) I have had my chances to have sex and said no, I believe it to be better for my wife someday knowing that she was worth waiting for to me that before I ever knew who she was that keeping myself from having sex to wait for her was to show her my want and desire to be intimate and only for her not every Suzy-Q I met through my years. God desires for the people of this earth that He created to be men and women of Integrity and to live by His book He worte through selected men. Furthermore, if you personally have any inclination that there might slightly be a chance that there is a God, would you not want to know what He wrote? Please do not reply to me that "the Bible was written by men" sure it was, men that walked and talked with the living God Himself, I strongly believe that if anyone of us walked and talked with Jesus for even a day that our lives would be so changed becuase the God dwelt among you and me in the flesh, He left Heaven (And yes there is a Heaven and a real Hell which is eternal seperation from the Living God which is my fellow man is definitely and by far the worst place that you could ever be. Trust me there are things there you and I cannot even imagine. I do not want to be in eternal darkness with shreiks of agaony in the air for an eternity while I would long to have even a drop of water on my tongue. The thought of me burning for an eternity is not to pleasing.) I do not claim to know all the answers, I could live on this planet a thousand lifetimes and everytime read the Scriptures with knowing the things I have learned from previous lifetimes and still not know all the mystery of God. (I do not believe in reincarnation, sorry there is no such thing!) Please send me replies, I will try my best to have an open mind and consider your questions or thoughts, for I know what I believe, and what I believe is the TRUTH! But I am not about to beat someone down, for as my Jesus taught I am commanded to love and if nothing else I willl love the people I come in contact with, whether Christian or non-Christiam, Jew or Gentile, man or woman, Caucasian, black, Asian, Hispanic, American Indian or be it any race of man which God in His Sovreign creative design, created all men and knit them together in each of their mother's womb. Thanks for your patience and your time. Please feel free to email me.

Originally posted by denim:
In this western culture, a lot of crud is folded into the concept of virginity. Why?

Virgins are "innocent", huh? Maybe in some sense. What they actually are is ignorant and inexperienced. They can be taken advantage of by others their age and otherwise, because they've not been trained on what to expect.

Sex education, starting at an early age like when kids start asking "where do babies come from" would be appropriate. When a kid asks this question, given that parents seem largely unwilling to really explain it clearly, and may be pretty darn ignorant themselves, he or she should be added to a group of his peers who have also asked it.

As a kid ages and becomes more interested in details, he or she should be given them. Period. No extra crap, no judgements about sex being "animal" or "dirty". It's not, even by religious standards: God created man and woman as they are, with their desires and their bodies. Declaring those things to be obscene strikes me as blasphemous.

So. Anyone here: have you never seen the opposite sex naked? I didn't say "appropriate", I said "opposite". If you're homosexual, it's not relevant to this discussion. Have you seen the opposite sex naked? How old were you, what was your reaction, and why did you react that way? Had you been told about the differences first? Were you curious, were you scared, were you upset? And why? After some answers to those questions, I'll continue.