Premarital sex: bad or good? Or neither?

[AFPheonix]

Flyn, have they ever had you on wellbutrin? It works on a different receptor than SSRIs do and a lot of people don't have that particular side effect with it.

[Flyndaran]

Flyn, have they ever had you on wellbutrin? It works on a different receptor than SSRIs do and a lot of people don't have that particular side effect with it.

Yeah. That was one of the non-drugs as I called them. It did nothing at all.
So far nothing works anywhere near as well as good old libido destroying Paxil for keeping me from hiding twitching in the closet. I am no taking small doses of helper drugs Clonazepam and Abilify and waiting for any helpful effects. So far no side effects, so here's hoping it all works.

I would like to keep a job for more than three days before all my hair turns grey. (I'm 34 and anxiety crippled since age 15.)

MystyGlitter said yes to it being wrong (along with anal/oral) on page 2.

There are plenty of non-pain based BDSM activities. Like... peeing on people! I'm sure that's much more understandable. =)

That's water sports not sadism or masochism and certainly not bondage.
I don't think that fits.
I personally think that the desire to feel pain in masochism or in delivering it in sadism is a mental disorder. But it's one that's easier to manage with consenting adults in a carefully planned relationship than through therapy.
It's how I see sex changes. Wanting to undergo surgery to remove healthy body parts is a mental illness. But it's one that's much easier to remedy via surgery than therapy.

[LewisLegion]

First let me state that I also do not engage and will not engage in pre-marital sex. Personally, I think that sex is the highest expression of love and respect there is, and giving it to whomever just to 'have fun' seems demeaning to me. Again, my personal opinion and how I choose to live my life. I tell no one else how to live, that's between them and the dictates of their own conscious. However, I do take minor exception to this:

Sex is a natural evolutionarilly demanding urge. It will happen unless one makes it their life to abstain for extreme periods of time, and that often causes all sorts of life problems aside from the overalll silliness of such an anti-fun attitude.

Sex is like eating things with sugar. It's techniically possible to live without them, but anyone trying to do so will have to modify their lives to such a degree as to make life a whole lot less enjoyable.

So because I don't want to have sex I'm silly and anti-fun? My life is less enjoyable? I know it is not how you meant it (at least I hope not) but this seems to be in the same as saying 'if you don't have sex, you must be miserable or there's simply something wrong with you.'

I have lots of fun. I'm a fun person. I love my life and I enjoy it in many capacities. I don't think the fact that I have not yet engaged in sex and will not unless I marry makes me in any way miserable or anti-fun. Someone who has sex a lot may not understand how someone else can live without it. That's fine, but lots of people do and are fine and healthy human beings.

[anriana]

That's water sports not sadism or masochism and certainly not bondage.I don't think that fits.

You probably don't think it fits because you left out several of the things BDSM stands for (dominance & submission.) Some people use water sports as part of erotic humiliation and some use it for other purposes, but either way it's considered a part of BDSM.

I personally think that the desire to feel pain in masochism or in delivering it in sadism is a mental disorder. But it's one that's easier to manage with consenting adults in a carefully planned relationship than through therapy.
It's how I see sex changes. Wanting to undergo surgery to remove healthy body parts is a mental illness. But it's one that's much easier to remedy via surgery than therapy.

The only nice thing I can say to that is I'm glad you're not a psychologist.

[DesignFox]

When it comes to sex, I say to each their own. As long as both partners are consenting and on the same page...go for it.

That said, I personally, think having sex before the marriage is important...mostly because...how the hell do you know you are compatible otherwise???

I mean...What if your partner turns out to LIKE BDSM and you don't??? What do you do? What if you just can't get into a good rhythm together?

I mean, I guess if you've never had it before, it may not be that important to you...but sex is important to me. I want to know my partner and I are compatible and can please one another.

Sex can be an incredible bonding experience...and that to me is how it should be. If you and your partner aren't compatible...I mean...that would just suck!

hehe and not for nothing, the very first time is...awkward. I'm glad I won't have that awkwardness creeping into my wedding night...Someone should have to throw cold water on me and my partner to separate us. (if that day ever comes)

All my opinion of course.

[AdminAssistant]

If a long-lasting relationship falls apart because of a sexual issue....how good was the relationship? I mean, in a marriage, eventually, you'll grow old together. You're not going to have the same body. Sex on a regular basis (probably) ain't going to happen. There's got to be more than sexual chemistry going on.

Marriage night: Every, and I mean EVERY married woman I have talked to has said they either did nothing on their wedding night, or just pumped out a quickie to say they did it. You're just too wiped on that particular evening to bring out the lingerie and fuzzy handcuffs.

Being single is no reason to not have sexual release. In other threads we've determined all guys do it. Well, girls can and should. Screw diamonds, batteries are a girl's best friend!!

I'm also not one for BDSM. Call me old-fashioned, call me a fogey. To me, pain = pain. Not pleasure. But to each their own. As a friend of mine said, "Nothing is more important to me than my orgasm and nothing is less important to me than your orgasm"

[LewisLegion]

If a long-lasting relationship falls apart because of a sexual issue....how good was the relationship? I mean, in a marriage, eventually, you'll grow old together. You're not going to have the same body. Sex on a regular basis (probably) ain't going to happen. There's got to be more than sexual chemistry going on.

Totally agree. By the time you know and love someone enough to even be talking marriage I would hope you would know enough about each other to know if one has some strange fetish, or if sexual chemistry is going to be an issue. And if you don't know and are finding yourself talking marriage...TALK to each other and ask. A human being isn't a car. Reducing pre-marital sex to a 'test-drive before deciding if you wanna purchase' to me is extremely dehumanizing and reducing a relationship down to one factor. What if someone found their soul mate, the love of their life, who for some reason physically could not indulge in the sex act at all? Should they halt the relationship because it lacks that one factor? Should sex really be THAT important?

Of course its *important* but it isn't the end-all be-all of a romantic relationship. I think today's society is far too sex-centered, focusing only on sex-appeal and physical appearance and 'having fun' and less on lasting, deeply involved relationships that take everything into account about a person and not just one or two things.

[anriana]

I have someone who I love deeply, who complements my personality and my interests, and who I've referred to as "an emotional soulmate" several times, but I'm not compatible with sexually. I call him my best friend and I would never, ever consider making a lifelong commitment to monogamy with him, because that would be silly. Both he and I would be completely miserable and probably not honor that commitment.


If I were to make that type of commitment to someone, they'd need to have all of the attributes he has AND be sexually compatible with me, otherwise, why should I make that commitment? I can't think of anything I can get from a partner that I can't get from my best friend + a friend with benefits.

[prb]

Here in Ontario, students are given sex education at the age of about 12, in 7th grade. I remember it to be both frank and extensive.

Started in Grade 4 for me. Same for my brother. Different schools.

[BookstoreEscapee]

Personally, I don't have a problem with premarital sex. For me, it has to be in a committed relationship. I was 26 when I first had sex, and I've only been with 3 people, all of whom I was in a long-term relationship with at the time. I do think it's an important part of a relationship, married or not, though I have to have time to get to know the person for a while, first. I won't jump into bed with someone on the first several dates (the TV-standard "third date" is just way too soon for me), and I've never, nor do I ever want to, have a one-night stand.

I don't care what quaint rituals conservatives want to practice, but they shoud keep them out of public policy.

I wholeheartedly agree with this. Sex education should be about preserving individual and public health (physical and psychological), not dictating morals.

But there's so many that would get pregnant and go "well, oops" and go get an abortion, which I really, REALLY have very personal issues with.

This is an attitude that a lot of "pro-life" people have; they often assume that every woman who is pro-choice is so casual about getting an abortion. I find it insulting. I am absolutely pro-choice, but if I were to find myself in the position of having to make that decision, believe me, it would not be so easy. It is extremely unlikely that I would choose to have an abortion, barring any serious medical reason. While there are certainly people out there who are callous enough to accidentally get pregnant, and just zip into the clinic and have it "taken care of," I would venture to say that the vast majority of women who have abortions do not take the decision so lightly. I do realize that you are talking about your own personal feelings; I appreciate that you wouldn't hold it against someone if they did have an abortion. I don't know who said it, but I agree wholeheartedly with the sentiment that abortion should be "safe, legal, and rare."

One has to evalute probabilities rationally. Sadly this is very hard for most people to do, especially when considering the media's terror alert of the day while always ignoring the FAR more common threats that are so common and real that they don't make "good news".

Absolutely. And this is one of the problems with abstinence-only programs. They do not teach teens to realistically evaluate the risks of having sex, and therefore do not teach them to minimize those risks.

My high school did sex ed in two pieces. Freshman year was the biology (which we learned back in 4th grade, anyway) and Senior year went into birth control, STDs, the emotional/psychological issues, and yes, even abortion. It was pretty comprehensive and open, though frankly, I think Senior year is too late. (For the record, I graduated HS in 1993.)

[DesignFox]

Of course its *important* but it isn't the end-all be-all of a romantic relationship.

I didn't say it was the end all. Just FTR. I just say I prefer to know that I'm compatible with the person before I end up committed to sleeping with them exclusively for the rest of my life.

Once I make a commitment that big, I want all my bases covered...and I want to totally commit myself to that person in every way. It's not something I take lightly.

And I'm not into BDSM, either. I'm just saying that until you start playing around you don't really know what you're into or what your boundaries are. Best to establish them before you get yourself in too deep to get out. I haven't exactly had a lot of partners, but the few I have had have each taught me something different about themselves and about myself.

*shrug*

Again. You want to wait? Great. I didn't. That's just my personal take on things.

I haven't thought of any of my partners as less than human beings. If anything, for the time we were together, the experiences we shared brought us extremely close as people. It has made it difficult to remain friendly since the relationship dissolved, but I don't think I'd trade it for anything. We got to know each other in ways most people never will.

[Boozy]

Started in Grade 4 for me. Same for my brother. Different schools.

May I be terribly rude and ask how old you are? I ask because I don't currently know anyone with kids in elementary school, and I wonder if they've been starting sex ed earlier since I left school. I was in grade 7 in 1990, so a lot may have changed.

I agree with Mad Mike: Grade 7 isn't terribly late, but it probably isn't early enough. I should probably be a continuing thing. For example, a seven-year old should probably know the basics about where babies come from, but doesn't need to know how to use a condom yet.

[DesignFox]

May I be terribly rude and ask how old you are? I ask because I don't currently know anyone with kids in elementary school, and I wonder if they've been starting sex ed earlier since I left school. I was in grade 7 in 1990, so a lot may have changed.

I know this wasn't directed at me, but I'd like to chime in. My sex ed started in 4th grade as well.

4th Grade we kids watched videos that were specific to our gender. In grade 5, we swapped videos, and I believe that was the time we watched the Live Birth video.

In middle school (6,7,8), our health classes introduced us to sex education. I don't remember exactly what we were taught though...don't remember if it went into safe sex or not, although I'm thinking the curriculum might have.

I know we were definitely being taught about that stuff starting in High School.

I graduated high school in 2000.

Fortunately for me, I didn't have to rely on the school system. My parents taught me about "where babies come from" when I was in about 2nd or 3rd grade...when I got old enough that sex might become an issue, they were very open and provided me with books, answers to my questions, etc.

Basically, their attitude has always been- do what you want, just don't be stupid. Unlike some of my friends, I was never forbidden from having the other gender over the house/in my room. (only exception was that there were no one-on-one boy sleepovers until I was 17- and he was my first long term boyfriend- but then I never even asked about that until then.) *shrug*

When I was a kid/teen I wasn't much interested in having sex, anyway. I was more involved with all my school work and after school activities. I couldn't be bothered, and I didn't understand the girls who got pregnant at 14, 16, etc...especially since I knew they'd been educated- we all went through the same curriculum.

[Flyndaran]

Porn taught me the "basics" that I really wanted to watch... I mean know.
Actual sex education other than mechanics was learned on my own. Schools that I went to started far too late and all I remember was the constant pounding into our skulls that A.I.D.S. can't be transmitted via casual contanct. And each freaking year, there were some kids that asked that question and still weren't satisfied with the answer.

So the most important lesson I learned from sex ed. was that the world is full of willfully ignorant idiots.

[Slytovhand]

OMG... 5 pages in, and still no-one has said it...

Premarital sex: bad or good? Or neither?

Well, some of it has been good, some has been bad. And a few times, it was rather neither....

Ok, now that the obligatories have been dealt with, firstly...

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, and I thought on this board, we were allowed to express it??? Mysty expressed her opinion, and why she has it (at least a part of it). I'm cool with that...

Secondly, I'll really really badly misquote someone.. "The 2 worst things about the human condition are sex and pain. We spend most of our time chasing one and avoiding the other, that we never really live our lives". (and it's the last bit that's the misquote...can't easily find it now) The gist of which is, obsession isn't a good thing, no matter what the obsession. Which is why many religions require or ask for celibacy... and some even just have it as a matter of course with not 'requirement' - it's just something you take on as part of your spiritual progress. Marriage doesn't work for some very serious religious pursuits.. and neither does sex in general.

For me, more personally, I can appreciate LL's comment on "sex as fun = dehumanizing for true emotion". But that's because everyone has a different take on sex, and also on what they see as 'respect'. I don't place that much significance on sex... I see it as a way to increase the human (or any other) race, and in lieu of having a genetic code that gives us a mating season (or at least, one that can be over-ridden) humanity has evolved so that we can have kids any time of the year. How to make sure that happens? Make it feel good! After all, if it didn't, would the human race still be around?? Ain't Mother Nature smart???

Sex = Sugar?? Ummm, I've got far more sugar in my diet than sex. It's easy to avoid. I've even turned it down.