Waiting until marriage for sex good or bad?

[omnusrubenn]

This is only true if someone's only goal is zeroing out risk. That's not really a sane goal.

Incidentally, you used only one definition. Merriam-Webster lists the definition of "sane" as follows:



I do not regard absolute avoidance of sex as fitting that. Quite the contrary, really.

It is common in the English language to only use one definition of a word at a time, unless the goal of the sentence is to be clever. The word choice is correct, even if you disagree with the stated opinion.

[Spectral]

It is common in the English language to only use one definition of a word at a time, unless the goal of the sentence is to be clever. The word choice is correct, even if you disagree with the stated opinion.

The person I replied to stated that being without sex is the only sane method. That's plainly stupid. Don't be pedantic.

[PrairieChicken]

Many researches say that couples who didn't have sex before marriage had higher marriage satisfaction compared to those who did

[Mormolyce]

most likely. Just as I would say sexual compatibility is also a choice. IMO, the real definition of "sexual compatibility" is just pure selfish desire. Granted, once you've gone there, and have had multiple partners, it's kind of difficult to shut that part of you off. However, if you are a virgin, there is nothing wrong with waiting and discovery and experiencing and learning what each other likes either.

It's all about how much you really want to be with that person. Personally, for me, sexual compatibility is an excuse. If you really want to be with a person, you'll be willing to experiment and find out how you work together in all facets of a relationship.

The best I can say about this is that it is very naive. You severely underestimate how different people's sexual desires can be. And you can't force yourself to be a certain way for someone when it is sexually unfulfilling for you, that will cause severe problems in the relationship in the long term. Just as you need to be compatible mentally and emotionally, you need to be compatible sexually. All three are equally important in an adult relationship.

[Spectral]

Many researches say that couples who didn't have sex before marriage had higher marriage satisfaction compared to those who did

Citation needed.

[omnusrubenn]

The person I replied to stated that being without sex is the only sane method. That's plainly stupid. Don't be pedantic.

Personal attacks do not invalidate the argument. Pedantic or no.

[Spectral]

Personal attacks do not invalidate the argument. Pedantic or no.

There's no personal attack in my post.

[Bathory]

"Lets poke fun at people for making choices that are different than mine! Yeah!!"

No thanks.

[Mormolyce]

Many researches say that couples who didn't have sex before marriage had higher marriage satisfaction compared to those who did

Since like 80% of people have had sex by the age of 18 you can probably imagine any survey like that has severe sampling bias. I believe the one you are referring to was conducted by a professor at a Mormon university. Specifically, Brigham Young University's School of Family Life - published in the Journal of Family Psychology (2010). I think you can probably see there might be a teensy bit of bias in there.

[Luko]

The best I can say about this is that it is very naive. You severely underestimate how different people's sexual desires can be. And you can't force yourself to be a certain way for someone when it is sexually unfulfilling for you, that will cause severe problems in the relationship in the long term. Just as you need to be compatible mentally and emotionally, you need to be compatible sexually. All three are equally important in an adult relationship.

Very well said.

[Issalice]

I share your sentiment. I wish I would have waited. Personally I don't see how it could possibly be bad for a relationship.

Way too much importance is placed on sex. Yeah its awesome, but it certainly wouldn't make or break a relationship for me. And if it did there would certainly be something wrong with the relationship. I have had 2 serious relationships apart from the one I am currently in. The first the guy was terrible, absolutely awful in bed. The second was amazing, world stopping great in bed. The quality of sex did not in anyway effect either relationship. And it shouldn't, you should be with someone because of how you feel towards them and how they feel about you. That is it.

[omnusrubenn]

I share your sentiment. I wish I would have waited. Personally I don't see how it could possibly be bad for a relationship.

Way too much importance is placed on sex. Yeah its awesome, but it certainly wouldn't make or break a relationship for me. And if it did there would certainly be something wrong with the relationship. I have had 2 serious relationships apart from the one I am currently in. The first the guy was terrible, absolutely awful in bed. The second was amazing, world stopping great in bed. The quality of sex did not in anyway effect either relationship. And it shouldn't, you should be with someone because of how you feel towards them and how they feel about you. That is it.

This means that if the quality of the sex changes -as it surely will- you maintain a committed relationship. This reflects and encourages tolerance and forgiveness in that if the quality of the relationship changes -as it surely will- you understand that they are still deserving of kindness and affection. This is love. Well said.

[announced]

its better to do it before u get married. one wrong move and oops.. early pregnancy.
plus most women dont want to marry a guy who doesnt know his business.
wrap it up and get practice.

[Zafire]

I share your sentiment. I wish I would have waited. Personally I don't see how it could possibly be bad for a relationship.

Way too much importance is placed on sex. Yeah its awesome, but it certainly wouldn't make or break a relationship for me. And if it did there would certainly be something wrong with the relationship. I have had 2 serious relationships apart from the one I am currently in. The first the guy was terrible, absolutely awful in bed. The second was amazing, world stopping great in bed. The quality of sex did not in anyway effect either relationship. And it shouldn't, you should be with someone because of how you feel towards them and how they feel about you. That is it.

It's not really the quality of the sex, it's more about the frequency of it. Even if the sex isn't high quality, I could settle with simply being able to enjoy the affection and release.

If I had a girlfriend with low to no libido, I would end up being very unhappy.

[Rendia]

Not a contradiction at all, just something you don't agree with. He was just saying his standards don't include casual promiscuity. Multiple partners is one thing, and more than likely to happen before marriage nowadays. But sleeping around just because "I can" is looked down upon because it trivializes something important to all of us; sex. You can't claim sex isn't important; the reasons for being important differ from person to person, but it IS important to most people, that's why we debate about it, argue about it, try to get it etc.

Sex is something that is extremely intimate, like kissing, but 100 times more. It takes work to be good at, and work to understand your partner to become good for them. Nothing worthwhile comes without effort, unless you're a superficial/shallow person capable of only enjoying the surface of things. In which case, yes your standards definitely differ from mine and while I won't ever be rude enough to say it to your face, of course I'm not going to bother forming a long term relationship of any sort with you, much less a partnership!

Casual sex is like cheating at games/gaining a promotion that is undeserved; in the sense that people who appreciate the skills/effort involved will never see it the same way as the people who just want it fast and easy. Cheaters at games have the same mindset; "it's just a game! why get upset cos I playing the system! I can do it! It's a free world! YOLO LOLOLOL".

Some things should take time, imo. Sex is one of them. It's not the all encompassing activity some people make it out to be, but it's something that has the potential to be truly great when time, effort and care is given. The time taken depends on the couple, of course, and waiting till marriage is a choice for each.

I meant "prostitute" and "free".

---------- Post added 2013-02-19 at 10:45 PM ----------

Think he meant the part "prostitute who gives it away for free" part lol By definition, prostitutes charge money.

At least Reg got it, lol.

Ohhhhh. True, my bad... and that statement is making me laugh now

It made me chuckle too.

---------- Post added 2013-02-19 at 10:48 PM ----------

I find it extremely interesting that many people feel the need to be "sexually compatible" in order to have a good romantic relationship. It seems that if someone is willing to leave the relationship because the sex is bad, then the relationship never stood a chance. Basing a relationship on sexual compatibility is pretty shallow and selfish, even. A real relationship is caring more about what the other person needs/wants and being there for them because you want to. This is possible without sex and this leads to lasting, loving, trusting relationships. Basing a relationship on sexual satisfaction is the reason why people can't seem to find happiness in a long-term relationship. Those that base their relationships on sexual compatibility treat sex as a way more important factor than those that wait for their special someone/marriage. I think that's ironic.

OT: good

No, it is far from selfish. And a relationship is not caring about what the other wants solely. It is a give and take.

Sounds to me like you haven't had good sex, it is very special. Perhaps you just haven't had the chance to meet the one to do it for you?

---------- Post added 2013-02-19 at 10:50 PM ----------

Many researches say that couples who didn't have sex before marriage had higher marriage satisfaction compared to those who did

How can there be "higher satisfaction"? They have no comparison.

[theageofmen]

Wait till marriage?

Ofcourse not, by that time you are old and dryed up.

U should **** as much as you can when u are young

[Deleted]

Talking from my personal point of view, I'm a Muslim and need to be married before having sex with a woman :3

[Mavecryst]

Talking from my personal point of view, I'm a Muslim and need to be married before having sex with a woman :3

I would still respect any Muslim man/woman (or any man/woman for that matter) who deliberately waited till marriage; since I know none (of all my Muslim friends I mean) :P That's an amazing amount of self restraint, (misguided or not, that's personal opinion) and difficult to find nowadays. I live in a society that considers itself fairly conservative, and even then I know of only ONE person who MAY have waited till she got married to have sex.

[papaz]

These forums are getting stranger by the day. Soon gaming will be a secondary topic to these kinds of questions and discussion. dafuq is the matter with people on the interwebz.

[Mavecryst]

These forums are getting stranger by the day. Soon gaming will be a secondary topic to these kinds of questions and discussion. dafuq is the matter with people on the interwebz.

Well these are "off-topic" forums :P You'll find any number of gaming topics in their respective sub-forums.