<p>Yes, GLM, that sounds like the best to me. That’s a great way to get to know people without having to get embroiled in all of this “committed relationship” business so soon.</p>
<p>I once saw one of my mother’s letters home to HER mother from the fall of 1952, in my mother’s first (and only) year of law school. Without making a big deal of it, the letter described seven different dates over one week with seven different guys – one of whom eventually became my father, but you would never guess from the letter that he would ever be more important than any of the others. She didn’t date every night; she missed one night working on a moot court brief, but made up for it by doubling up on Saturday. What a different era THAT was! It sounded absolutely exhausting.</p>
<p>I know, from other documentary evidence, that she and my father were sleeping together before they got married. I have never asked her if she had been involved that way with anyone else before him.</p>
<p>I agree with dke that serial monogamy may not be optimal for young people. But only some kids are like that. Between the start of 12th grade and the summer after my college graduation, I never had a “relationship” that lasted more than 4-5 weeks, and there tended to be big gaps between those during which I was playing the field (to the extent I was playing at all). My son just went three years between official girlfriends, although there were certainly some almosts in between there, and my daughter . . . I’m still waiting for the first official boyfriend. She has lots of what would have passed for dates in my mother’s day, with gay men. (So did my mother, for that matter.)</p>
<p>Joy,</p>
<p>"It’s also not the case that if you don’t sleep with someone you will be a ‘deer in the headlights’ when married (Opie?). There are many, many ways to get to know someone’s character (whether they are kind & cherishing, for instance) without complete physical intimacy. "</p>
<p>Please explain divorce to me then Joy, because usually it involves someone becoming “not the person I married”. People fake things all the time, not just orgasms either. So yes, a deer in the headlights is an appropriate remark.</p>
<p>However, that said… none of this is absolute black and white. premaritial sex or post marritial sex are not absolutes in the success or failure. It isn’t yes or no, it’s many things. Abstaining is not an answer, it’s a choice. EVERY CHOICE</p>
<p>My parents were born in the 1910’s (1912-dad; 1915-mom) and married in the early 1940s. While I was in college in 1970, my dad and I had a conversation about me living with a female without marriage in college. He related that he had a college girl move in with him for awhile when he was in college in 1930. His observation was that people really haven’t changed all that much over time, but that we (the kids of the late 1960s’) “just talked about it more.”</p>
<p>I saw my S traverse junior high and high school to graduate HS in 2007. It was pack/group socializing until they got their driver’s licenses. Even after they were mobile, pairing off and leaving the group scene was the exeption. Eventually there was “THE GF,” but both he and she did stuff with friends of both sexes even when they were a “couple.” </p>
<p>This issue of commitment to one person in high school seemed to come down to this. My S’s school and that of his GF provided superb sex education, including BC information. So, they were “prepared.” They did have a huge group and participated “in mass” before and during their pairing off in their junior year. </p>
<p>They both agreed that the couple was “over” at the end of the summer after HS. I asked him if he thought this change would be hard on them personally. He said that they both had goals in getting educated and wanted to be able to experience all that college had to offer. He said that girls seem to want an education and that “finding a husband” was secondary to that.</p>
<p>He has found a group at college. I’m sure she has too. Do I assume he will be sexually active? Yes. Will some of it be casual? Yes. Will some of it be serial monogamy? It wouldn’t surprise me one way or the other. I am satisfied if he practices safe sex and isn’t a predator.</p>
<p>whoops… to continue</p>
<p>EVERY CHOICE has several possible outcomes, not just one. Joy, you describe several positive relationships, yet another here who has been pm’ing nasty nasty remarks can’t seem to find a decent man anywhere… it isn’t the same and neither you or I can claim our solution is always correct in every situation. </p>
<p>I think we can agree married or not, we hope our children find people who are caring, loving, respectful and kind. They don’t have to or have not to enjoy sex with them, just that their experiences are positive. </p>
<p>What we should avoid is passing on a guilt trip from generation to generation, a person shouldn’t be made to feel guilty about what they choose to do with their body and in what time frame. I’ve never said someone shouldn’t wait, if that’s what they want, but they shouldn’t cast stones on anyone else for their choices. </p>
<p>And for my personal PM friend, you just want to continue the nasty nasty views used against you and others, rather than change them, fine. be that way. continue to spread hate about men and women… I pity you and moreso I pity your offspring. You are more of a problem then they are because you continue their hate towards women in your own words.</p>
<p>The links I posted about how those that judge others are also judging/hurting themselves reminded me of when I was preparing to get married.
I had been living with my boyfriend for sometime and while we had been talking about getting married, it wasn’t a “big ticket Item”- however when I became pregnant for the third time- we thought perhaps that was a sign ?</p>
<p>Anyway- although we were adults, had been living on our own for some time- ( me since I was 17)were taking care of all of the costs and planning for the wedding ourselves, his parents, at least his mother, was quite angry and upset that " I was trapping him into marriage" and that we would have a child right away. ( we didn’t actually, I had a miscarriage that began a few days before the ceremony and completed a few days after-
)</p>
<p>Well- it was hardly unusual for a couple who had lived together for four years to be having sex/get married. I tried not to internalize her anger and tried to be polite, but I have never been very good with dealing with hostile people.
( Neither has my H- especially when it was his mother)</p>
<p>I gained better perspective a few years ago, when his parents celebrated their 50th wedding anniversary. In November 2004.
My H turned 50 in May 2005. ;)</p>
<p>Your post reminded me of a conversation with a long dead aunt. She would be about 95 if alive…</p>
<p>She was showing me her wedding pictures, and I remarked on her beautiful, incredibly large bouquet. Her sister chimed in that it had to be so large to hide that she was about 5 months along. Long, apparently happy, marriage-they became pillars of the community and active in the church. So the folks in the 1960’s didn’t discover pre-marital sex at all.</p>
<p>Does anyone know who is credited in saying " I learned that sex is very, very dirty and I have to save it for someone I love very much" I have heard that it was some musician from Lubbock Texas, but unsure who.</p>
<p>Butch Hancock ( who I really enjoy- I first saw him at a Woody Guthrie tribute- he doesn’t make it to Seattle very often) [try</a> this cd](<a href=“http://www.rollingstone.com/reviews/album/118909/review/5943513/eatsawaythenight]try”>http://www.rollingstone.com/reviews/album/118909/review/5943513/eatsawaythenight)</p>
<p>apparently is credited with that quote</p>
<p>[“Life</a> in Lubbock, Texas taught me two things. One is that God loves you and you’re going to burn in hell. The other is that sex is the most awful, dirty thing on the face of the earth and you should save it for someone you love.” - Butch Hancock.](<a href=“http://www.barrypopik.com/index.php/new_york_city/entry/life_in_lubbock_texas_taught_me_two_things_butch_hancock/]“Life”>“Life in Lubbock, Texas taught me two things…” (Butch Hancock))</p>
<p>My parents are another example of pre-marital sex in the 1950s. They celebrated their 50th wedding anniversary several years ago.</p>
<p>as Mini would point out- fertility was a point to be determined *before *marriage often times & while I don’t think I would want to be married at 14, we now become sexually mature much earlier than we are usually ready to provide for and raise a family.
I think it is prudent to teach kids ( by that I mean provide them with appropriate information) about taking care of their own sexual needs so that hormones aren’t pushing them where they aren’t ready to go.</p>
<p>I don’t think kids in college are having more sex than any other young people that age. It must really depend on your perspective, my high school senior daughter for example, is quite beautiful( of course who isn’t at 17?- not bragging 'mam just fact 
), but while she goes to dances with her friends and is very involved in school & community activities has never been on a “date” and while has had crushes on singers and actors & even classmates- doesn’t seem ready/ too interested for romantic complications to interfere with her goals.
I think she is very wise.</p>
<p>My mother was pregnant with her first child when she got married in the early 50’s. She tried to hide that fact from me for years.</p>
<p>I thought I remembered that it was from one of the Flatlanders (Joe Ely is my personal favorite) I first saw the quote in the film “Education of Shelby Knox” a very good, sometimes tedious film on sex ed in Lubbock Texas. The quote really rings true with how we are split on what we teach our kids–</p>
<p>Opie,
I think the idea of one generation passing on a “guilt trip” about sex, etc. is much, much less of a problem than in previous generations (as anecdotely evidenced by the parental discussion here). What might be seen as more of a problem in the area of sexual relationships among young people is a hyper-sexualized popular culture (see: explicit music, television, movies) and an increase in young women adopting the ‘casual sex’ mode that historically was more common in men–even though most girls are emotionally/biologically wired to attach after physical encounters. </p>
<p>To the OP – here are some books your daughter/you might find interesting on the topic – with a perspective that runs contrary to much of the current cultural approach to the issue.</p>
<p>“A Return to Modesty” by Wendy Shalit
<a href=“http://www.amazon.com/RETURN-MODESTY-Discovering-Lost-Virtue/dp/[/url]”>http://www.amazon.com/RETURN-MODESTY-Discovering-Lost-Virtue/dp/</a>
0684863170/ref=sr<em>1</em>1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1197577528&sr=8-1</p>
<p>Excerpt from Amazon: Why," asks the author, “is sexual modesty so threatening to some that they can only respond to it with charges of abuse or delusion?” </p>
<p>“In her thoughtful three-part essay, the author reveals an impressive reading list as she probes the cultural history of sexual modesty for women and considers whether this virtue may be beneficial in today’s world–if not an antidote to misogyny. In an age when women are embarrassed by sexual inexperience, when sex education is introduced as early as primary school, and when women suffer more than ever from eating disorders, stalking, sexual harassment, and date rape, Shalit believes a return to modesty may place women on equal footing with men. She yearns for a time when conservatives can believe the claims of feminists and feminists can differentiate between patriarchy and misogyny and share in the dialectic of female sexuality.”</p>
<p>Also:
“Girls Gone Mild: Young Women Reclaim Self-Respect and Find It’s Not Bad to Be Good” also by Wendy Shalit</p>
<p>[Amazon.com:</a> Girls Gone Mild: Young Women Reclaim Self-Respect and Find It’s Not Bad to Be Good: Books: Wendy Shalit](<a href=“http://www.amazon.com/Girls-Gone-Mild-Reclaim-Self-Respect/dp/1400064732/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1197578141&sr=1-1]Amazon.com:”>http://www.amazon.com/Girls-Gone-Mild-Reclaim-Self-Respect/dp/1400064732/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1197578141&sr=1-1)</p>
<p>Some of these posts about premarital sex back in the 1930s-1950s are blowing my mind!! My grandmother had 7 sisters, and I think that ALL of them were virgins on their wedding day. They HAD to be for her to be so prissy about my mother being pregnant before marriage, and then I as well! I actually think what was going on is that their fiances must have been getting elsewhere, I can’t believe these women were “doing it”!</p>
<p>"My grandmother had 7 sisters, and I think that ALL of them were virgins on their wedding day. They HAD to be for her to be so prissy about my mother being pregnant before marriage, and then I as well! "</p>
<p>That’s not necessarily true. It could be that they were very active before they got married, and that’s why your grandmom was so prissy.</p>
<p>I was out to dinner with an acquaintance who started talking to our waiter about the “necessity of avoiding fornication.” She said that in response to learning that he was a college student who was married. Her statement apparently was to congratulate him for getting married instead of having unmarried sex.</p>
<p>I was incredibly embarassed by her tirade, and I assumed that she had been celibate before marriage.I especially assumed this since she makes a point of letting virtually everyone know that she, a middle aged widow, is celibate now. </p>
<p>After I got to know her better, I found out that her 2 children were born out of wedlock to 2 different fathers when she was a teen, and she also had had several abortions. Her celibacy and primness about sex was a relatively new way of her behaving.</p>
<p>dke–multiple dating (w/out deep involvement of various types) is a great way for women to date in this day & age as well. I did it for a while and it’s a wonderful way to assess a man’s character/qualities without getting too committed, too soon. Plus, it saves time because you can meet & evaluate a lot of people over a shorter period. :-)</p>
<p>“Her celibacy and primness about sex was a relatively new way of her behaving.”</p>
<p>A mulligan? a do over? :)</p>
<p>I fail to see that there is a correlation between modesty and self-respect. </p>
<p>If “modesty” is defined as observing the proprieties of dress and behavior (a dictionary definition), the question is whose mores set the standards of "propriety? If it is defined by current culture, being “modest” may be anything but “chaste.” Chaste meaning (once again from the dictionary) refraining from acts or even thoughts or desires that are not virginal or not sanctioned by marriage vows.</p>
<p>Even being “chaste” doesn’t mean that person has self-respect. “Self-respect” (dictionary) is a proper respect for oneself as a human being. Therein lies the rub. Humans are social animals, sexual by nature. Modesty may be (and chastity is) a denial of the social, sexual aspect of being a human being.</p>
<p>The real problem is confusing self-righteousness (convinced of one’s own righteousness especially in contrast with the actions and beliefs of others) with self-respect.</p>
<p>I think dating without sexuality is a bit weird, and I know I wouldn’t have enjoyed that.</p>
<p>I know my mother did a lot of that in college and did wait for marriage to proceed with her sexuality. She is an incredible prude. She can’t watch movies that have people kissing let alone being intimate.</p>
<p>My dad died when she was 54. She refused to “date” after that because she wanted what she had when she was young: attention with no sex.</p>
<p>I am not making a causal relationship here. I just think that if we are of a certain age, let’s say past 17 since that’s the number being thrown around here, we want to express ourselves in our relationships. Yes, get to know people in many settings. But I wouldn’t want to be seeing many people in the old fashioned way. Dinner, dancing, flowers, et al seem very stilted to me. Getting dressed up. It just seems like work.</p>
<p>But that’s me. I have been happy and had good luck with my relationships. Some have not been great successes because of complicated personal issues on both our parts, but all the men I have known have been caring, intelligent, humorous, fun people. I treasure knowing them.</p>
<p>My D is having the same difficult time I did from being very outspoken, and in her case, beautiful all at the same time. She has had boyfriends but most are not ready for the same level of commitment she is, and I think she is a bit intimidating. But these are emotional, not sexual needs, and they are more difficult to satisfy. All I can say is, “Hang in there, babe.”</p>
<p>Plus, it saves time because you can meet & evaluate a lot of people over a shorter period.</p>
<p>:D
[much shorter period](<a href=“http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/living/2004056602_raildating09.html”>http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/living/2004056602_raildating09.html</a>)</p>