Should chastity be cherished?

[CheeryFox 23,821]

I've had fun lots of times - so my answer is 'not for me.' 

[Leere 8,291]

A person wants to keep their virginity till marriage? Fine by me

A person wants to go around and bang several different people? Also fine by me.

[Leave a Whisper 703]

Only for the individual, no one has no right to try and enforce it on adults.

[Steve Piranha 29,428]

Humans are extremely secual beings, and repressing that is pretty unhealthy. I think people should feel free too have sex with those they feel close with, but I don't like how the media overly sexualises things for both men and women.

I don't believe in slut shaming, but I also don't think dressing in revealing clothes, getting drunk and sleeping with as many men as possible should be shown as a good thing either.

I dunno how I've survived my whole teen years without faping then . STEP ASIDE NO FAP MONTH WINNERS, HERE'S YOUR KING 

 

 

 

 

Anyway, each one of their own (except rapist). I think it's too archaic this save your virginity till marriage thing (funny it's usually imposed towards women, while we dudes get praised by sleeping around . Here's another fine double standard BS  ). Anyway, I believe sex is WAY more satisfactory if done to increase the bond with your partner, and for more than just the sake of it (at least the latter ain't for me, and I'VE DONE IT FOR REULZ). If I don't have one of those, I just need internet, and a hand 

[Concerned Bystander 2,902]

 

 

Humans are extremely secual beings, and repressing that is pretty unhealthy.

 

It really isn't.  That is the sort of argument that is used by someone trying to pressure a reluctant partner into having sex with them.

 

Yes, humans are sexual beings, and they should certainly be able to do whatever they want to do with an appropriate consenting partner, but there is nothing at all 'unhealthy' about abstention.

[They call me Loyalty 1,948]

Either way is fine. It's not like you're gonna change people by imposing a particular perception.

[Meire 100]

Well i only say its good because when you meet someone who you truly truly like, then you can have foals with that person and be together forever and ever. I just tend to like romance, so in favor of feelings i say yes.

[StormBlaze 992]

lol chastity? not for this one XP have too much and my freaking god in this day and age, do you have any idea how difficult it is to even get to married level?

 

being somewhat sensible and we've decided to get house and jobs first. At least we know what we're like living together in our own house. So technically we have everything married life offers except actually being married. But this life all comes down to money Im afraid. neither of us are from religious backgrounds and we've had our share of bad choices and partners in the past so its only natural that we're in bed straight away.

 

also personally its more fun and better for both of you if at least one of you knows what their doing and has experience. my first time, with my first boyfriend was kiiinda awkward because neither of us really knew how to do. x.x 

 

its taken me 7 years (from when I was 18) to get to this level in my life, im very happy now and there was no way i was gonna hold out for 9 years (when I was 16). maybe id have thought about that back before i even got a proper boyfriend, but it wouldve left me the frigid Fluttershy type of person i cant stand. Go out and play, but be safe of course. dont be stupid about it. 

 

Also legal age of consent is 16 over here, so screw waiting. British point of view, im aware its different in other countries. 

Edited November 7, 2016 by StormBlaze

[Dreambiscuit 9,877]

Chastity, like any virtue, should be cherished and protected. Once it's gone, it's gone. I don't judge those who have given it away in the passion of the moment or even in a premeditated act before the wisdom of a bigger picture has sunk in. It's easy to get caught up in it. But responsibility should be taught and encouraged in place of the 'do as you please' attitude of modern society. There are reasons that guidelines discouraging irresponsible behavior are in place. Just consider if you were married, and your spouse went out and had sex with someone else because he or she just felt like it. You'd be pissed, wouldn't you? Many a marriage has dissolved over it. So I put it to you, what's the difference between doing it casually before marriage as opposed to cheating against your spouse during marriage? It's still the same act. If you're single now, there's always the possibility you will be married someday, and so you must save yourself for the spouse you may someday have. Marriage would be far more likely if people would honor what it means and not assume it's just an impossible dream of the far off future. You have to live for the hope of the future and in honor of it. If not for yourself, do the right thing for your future spouse (and other peoples' future spouses). I'm sure you would appreciate it if they did the same for you. 

Edited November 11, 2016 by Dreambiscuit

[ARagY 1,152]

Chastity, like any virtue, should be cherished and protected. Once it's gone, it's gone. I don't judge those who have given it away in the passion of the moment or even in a premeditated act before the wisdom of a bigger picture has sunk in. It's easy to get caught up in it. But responsibility should be taught and encouraged in place of the 'do as you please' attitude of modern society. There are reasons that guidelines discouraging irresponsible behavior are in place. Just consider if you were married, and your spouse went out and had sex with someone else because he or she just felt like it. You'd be pissed, wouldn't you? Many a marriage has dissolved over it. So I put it to you, what's the difference between doing it casually before marriage as opposed to cheating against your spouse during marriage? It's still the same act. If you're single now, there's always the possibility you will be married someday, and so you must save yourself for the spouse you may someday have. Marriage would be far more likely if people would honor what it means and not assume it's just an impossible dream of the far off future. You have to live for the hope of the future and in honor of it. If not for yourself, do the right thing for your future spouse (and other peoples' future spouses). I'm sure you would appreciate it if they did the same for you. 

And then you have the great pleasure of finding out you and your spouse are not sexually compatible.  And actually no, I wouldn't be pissed if my spouse had sex with someone else. 

Edited November 11, 2016 by ARagY

[simba86 1,541]

I think it is yes, but it seems people really don't care anymore and they have sex with anyone and everyone and then wind up single raising 3 kids on foodstamps while suing the fathers for child support

very few people wait until they are married with steady money before they have kids and half the people I work with are younger than I am and whine about all the money they lose out of there check for child support.

it is a "do whatever and then whine about the consequinces" world

[Concerned Bystander 2,902]

Just consider if you were married, and your spouse went out and had sex with someone else because he or she just felt like it. You'd be pissed, wouldn't you? Many a marriage has dissolved over it. So I put it to you, what's the difference between doing it casually before marriage as opposed to cheating against your spouse during marriage? It's still the same act.

 

You are comparing apples and oranges tractors.  It may be the same act, but carried out in two entirely different contexts.  If you are married, then you have made a commitment to the person you are married to, and hopefully, you have both been honest about your past, if and when you have chosen to share it.  If you are not in a committed relationship with another person then you absolutely do not owe a debt of fidelity to a person that you may not have even met yet, let alone committed to.

 

If you choose to save yourself for your eventual spouse, then that's great, go for it.  However, to suggest that an unmarried person who decides to have sex with someone is cheating on a spouse that they may or may not ever have is nothing more than nonsense to the majority of people in a secular country.

Edited November 11, 2016 by Concerned Bystander

[Sunny Fox 5,951]

I don't judge those who have given it away in the passion of the moment or even in a premeditated act before the wisdom of a bigger picture has sunk in. It's easy to get caught up in it.

 

How is that not judging? You are literally saying anyone who has sex before marriage is one day going to realize how evil they were to do that in the first place. The "wisdom of a bigger picture"? Who decides what the bigger picture is? You?

[Dreambiscuit 9,877]

And then you have the great pleasure of finding out you and your spouse are not sexually compatible.  And actually no, I wouldn't be pissed if my spouse had sex with someone else. 

Just curious, what does sexually compatible mean exactly? I hear the term quite a lot but I figure that if you love someone enough to marry them, you are compatible. Or at least you'll have the joy of a married life in which you'll be learning the intimate intricacies of your partner and becoming more compatible. That's half the fun.

 

You are comparing apples and oranges tractors.  It may be the same act, but carried out in two entirely different contexts.  If you are married, then you have made a commitment to the person you are married to, and hopefully, you have both been honest about your past, if and when you have chosen to share it.  If you are not in a committed relationship with another person then you absolutely do not owe a debt of fidelity to a person that you may not have even met yet, let alone committed to.

 

If you choose to save yourself for your eventual spouse, then that's great, go for it.  However, to suggest that an unmarried person who decides to have sex with someone is cheating on a spouse that they may or may not ever have is nothing more than nonsense to the majority of people in a secular country.

It may be fine for a lot of people to do what they want and then change their ways only once (or if) they get married, but not all agree. Hence, my opinion as opposed to yours. Everyone has to live according to their own beliefs and conscience. 

The secular country is what it is, according to modern influences, which are polar opposites to bygone days when one would be ostracized for adultery, much the same way people are often ostracized now for chastity. What one considers to be nonsense is all relative to what is currently deemed socially acceptable. So again, to each his/her own. No argument, just opinion. 

 

How is that not judging? You are literally saying anyone who has sex before marriage is one day going to realize how evil they were to do that in the first place. The "wisdom of a bigger picture"? Who decides what the bigger picture is? You?

That's taking it way out of context and seeking to be offended for the point of making an argument. I specifically stated that it's very easy to get caught up in sex. Hence I do not judge anyone for doing so. I clearly did not say anyone is evil for doing it. That's just twisting my words and meaning around. What I did say is that an attitude of abstinence would be a good idea and would help people in moments of temptation rather than encourage something that they may (and in many cases, do) regret afterward. The example I gave is a 'what if' and among many angles by which I could illustrate my opinion. As for who determines the 'bigger picture,' it isn't me at all, but YOU. Only with age and experience will we all individually gain the perspective of a bigger picture. Each in their own time and place. 

All in all, this is MY opinion, and you are not required to agree with it. But take it in context because I'm not here to argue the point endlessly. Stating an opinion is not going to change anyone determined to ignore it, and I don't care either. But I will make my point regardless of how popular it may be. 

Edited November 12, 2016 by Dreambiscuit

[ARagY 1,152]

Just curious, what does sexually compatible mean exactly? I hear the term quite a lot but I figure that if you love someone enough to marry them, you are compatible. Or at least you'll have the joy of a married life in which you'll be learning the intimate intricacies of your partner and becoming more compatible. That's half the fun.

If you love someone enough, you are compatible..to love them, not necessarily to have sexual relations. This is of particular notice when kinks come into play. There are some things for me for instance that are exciting and at the same time leave me in a depressed state for weeks if its not right. What's the likelihood of your success if you don't share it? Also, there are some others that simply can make one feel uneasy and just generally makes the entire situation undoable in many senses. Not everyone is vanilla. I learned that a while ago. 

 

On becoming more compatible, I say it can only happen to a certain degree - however much of your natural reactions you're willing to ignore or can ignore. Seeing your own blood for example can repulse one person and excite another. It's going to be quite difficult for one faint of heart to deal with that. "But  maybe you don't do that then" you may say. Yeah, and you miss out on that much of an intimate connection with it.  It's not that you should marry for sex or break up because someone doesn't share your sock fetish, because I'm sure you can find some way to work it out. But other times its just overwhelmingly too different to make it work, and assuming you do still retain these needs, if you really do want to stay together, you may want to consider an alternative form of relationship, mainly getting these needs satisfied by someone else. That's all I can think of.

Edited November 12, 2016 by ARagY

[Dreambiscuit 9,877]

If you love someone enough, you are compatible..to love them, not necessarily to have sexual relations. This is of particular notice when kinks come into play. There are some things for me for instance that are exciting and at the same time leave me in a depressed state for weeks if its not right. What's the likelihood of your success if you don't share it? Also, there are some others that simply can make one feel uneasy and just generally makes the entire situation undoable in many senses. Not everyone is vanilla. I learned that a while ago. 

 

On becoming more compatible, I say it can only happen to a certain degree - however much of your natural reactions you're willing to ignore or can ignore. Seeing your own blood for example can repulse one person and excite another. It's going to be quite difficult for one faint of heart to deal with that. "But  maybe you don't do that then" you may say. Yeah, and you miss out on that much of an intimate connection with it.  It's not that you should marry for sex or break up because someone doesn't share your sock fetish, because I'm sure you can find some way to work it out. But other times its just overwhelmingly too different to make it work, and assuming you do still retain these needs, if you really do want to stay together, you may want to consider an alternative form of relationship, mainly getting these needs satisfied by someone else. That's all I can think of.

I guess it's all in what you would want to get out of your marriage, and what you would want to put into it. On one hand, it's about living for one's partner rather than getting off on one's favorite kinks. On the other hand, if your partner is equally concerned for your happiness, he/she would recognize that sacrifices have to be made both ways. Hopefully, and ideally, there would be a middle ground that both could be happy with (it just depends on both parties). Marriage is a lot of give and take. And as I see it, lovemaking is more about connecting on a level that goes beyond just physical pleasure and truly becoming one in mind and soul. But again, it's all in what your priorities are. If you and your prospective spouse don't share a willingness to make the same sacrifices for each other, then I guess that would equate to incompatibility, more in personality than anything else, and that would not go so good in marriage.

[Justin_Case001 4,896]

I agree with the majority in this thread in that chastity is not inherently virtuous, and people shouldn't be judged for sexual choices.  Sex carries risks, which can be discussed, and it's not something to take lightly.  Maturity and education are vital for making sexual decisions.  However, the idea that virginity is in and of itself something precious, and chastity something pure, is quite frankly ridiculous.  Claiming that a person is somehow ruined or soiled by losing their virginity before marriage is harmful.  Now, personally, I have never placed any meaning on the institution of marriage, and advocate that a person's own promise and commitment is all that matters.  A government issued contract shouldn't be needed for that.  To me, marriage is nothing more than a legal convenience for being able to make medical decisions on your spouse's behalf, cosign for a loan, etc.  But that's beside the point.  The point is that people shouldn't be judged and made to feel less valuable for their sexual choices.

 

Virginity and chastity have no inherent virtue.  There is nothing noble or pure about depriving yourself in any specific way.  It seems to me that such a claim is fundamentally no different than claiming that not eating cake makes you pure, and that you should save your unspoiled palette for your spouse, so that he/she can bake you a cake, and it will be the first you've ever tried.  The only things that have inherent virtue are qualities of how we treat others.  Being honest, kind, compassionate, etc, is virtuous.  Being chaste has no direct connection to virtue.  Chastity is amoral--it is neither moral, nor immoral.  Moreover, a person's sexual history has no bearing on how much love and intimacy they can give to their current or future partner.

 

That said, if a person wants to save themselves for marriage, or for their true love, then that's fine.  More power to them.  If it's something they want to do, if it a goal, then it's admirable to stick to it.  But if it's not something that's important to them, then that's fine, too.  It's not a failure of character.  As for me personally, I would only ever have sex with my true love, my one committed partner.  This decision has nothing to do with purity or nobility--it's simply because I would feel incapable of such an intimate act apart from with someone I truly loved.  It's just what's right for me.

 

@Nightmare Muffin, during my time on the forums, it has seemed to me that you have a few ideas that I believe are misguided.  You must always do what's right for you, but I strongly encourage you to be cautious in how you look at others, and try not to judge them based on how you choose to live.  The only thing that anyone should be judged on is how they treat others.  As long as we are respectful and aren't hurting each other, then there shouldn't be a problem.

[KatonRyu 1,033]

While I agree that seeing sex as a status symbol isn't a great trend, I also don't think waiting for marriage is necessary. Having sex is an important part of a relationship, and I think it should certainly be experienced before deciding to theoretically spend your entire lives together. Ultimately, I don't think virginity is very important as long as you only have sex because you yourself want to, not because people tell you it's cool to have sex and you should do it or you won't be cool.

[Miss 6,230]

Though I think having hella sex with random people is not a good idea because some people could be dangerous.

Also not having safe sex is obviously dangerous. Some people do it and nothing bad ever happens to them so fuck it. Keep enjoying sex.

 

If someone wants to only have sex when they're married then alright that's his or her own decision.

 

The way I see it sex is awesome, feels great, etc. There's no reason to deprive yourself of sex when you can actually have consensual sex.

I'm kinda asexual, as in, I don't make effort to have sex (also I'm aromantic so obviously I'm not getting in relationships) but if someone I trust,care about, etc. wanted to have sex then I would be like hell yea.

But yea if someone tells me they never had sex I wouldn't give two shits the same way if somebody told they have sex every day.

Edited November 12, 2016 by Misscellanio

[Pripyat Pony 2,608]

My personal view is this. Whether you want to save yourself for marriage, or have sex freely, then both are good. It depends on what you yourself choose. However, before you have sex, you must be sure of the following:

 

1. You are ready to have sex, are not being pressured into it, and feel something for your chosen partner. I do not agree that virginity ought to be the ideal and be saved for the wedding night, but neither do I agree with the view that everyone should just jump into bed with everyone, regardless of feelings. The best sex I ever have had, or ever will have, is the sex I have with my boyfriend. When two people love each other, sex is better than if two people are strangers to each other. That is not to say that a person can't have one night stands or casual relationships, but if they do, then it must be what they want, not something that they're doing to compensate for lack of parental love, to fill a hole caused by mental anguish, or cuz they constantly get drunk and lose control.

 

2. You have sorted out contraception, worked out a "plan b" for what to do if pregnancy results, and both of you are agreed on the details. Thing is, if you feel embarrassed to discuss condoms, the pill, the cap etc, then sorry, but you are not mature enough to have sex. If you are female, then you can go to your doctor and ask to go on the pill, no questions asked. The doctor will not tell your parents so don't worry. Condoms can be bought at any chemist's shop. Get contraception sorted out before you have sex, not after. If, despite protecting yourself, pregnancy does occur, then what steps do you plan to take? If a condom breaks, then the very next morning, go to the chemist and get the morning after pill. If this kind of thing scares you, then, don't have sex as you are obviously not ready.

 

3. You are comfortable with your partner and trust them not to spill the beans the day after and/or ditch you. There's no point in having sex, only to be dumped the next day or have stories spread all around. Some things are meant to be private between partners and should not be told to anyone else. If your partner is trying to push you into sex by saying, "If you loved me, you would" or "If you don't, I'll dump you" then don't do it. Kick them to the kerb cuz they are not trustworthy and by doing this, you can keep your self respect.

 

In conclusion, I would say that whether you're married or not, you should only have sex if you both want to and are ready, as well as mature enough to discuss contraception and any consequences that might result.

[Baykush 328]

Just do what feels right and don't do what doesn't.