Virginity and Going Away To College

Parent Cafe
461

<p>mythmom–me too! I’ve found the vast majority of men to be great (friends, relatives, colleagues, acquaintances)! I don’t think that changes the premise that there is a different bio make-up when it comes to sexual matters.</p>

<p>But, as mentioned earlier, biological tendencies/urges need not govern in an evolved culture (although how they inform behavior shouldn’t be ignored). </p>

<p>That’s why I’ll give my son the same advice about waiting until marriage as I would my daughter (& hope for the best!).</p>

462

<p>In marriage counseling, I recall two suggestions that really struck home. In your relationship don’t generalize, i.e., all Men -------, Women never----- etc. And, discuss what is the immediate issue, not “you always-------, you never---------.”</p>

<p>While this is a thread on the internet, not marriage counseling, it seems that some posters can and choose to focus on the relationships they have had and evaluate them as unique experiences that are part of the sum of “the person” the poster is and has become. Others seem to want to relate universal “truths” about their sex and the opposite sex.</p>

<p>SO, I ask you posters, what is it that you value in you and a lifemate? </p>

<p>For me, these traits are essential in both people for an enriching and stable marriage:</p>

<p>*Open and honest on feelings and concerns. Just drop the silent martyr and high drama.</p>

<p>*Sense of humor. Forget “the end of the world” doom and gloom.</p>

<p>*Co-operative spirit in working on and through the inter-personal and outside world problems that present themselves. It is called a “couple” because there two people involved.</p>

<p>*Commitment to continue to try on all issues: financial, sexual, health (weight and general wellness both physical and mental) and spiritual. Don’t be dead weight for your spouse to have to carry.</p>

<p>As I am now on the down side of 55, I want to be the person my wife wants in the foxhole with her and she is the person I want in there with me. And, we try to be that person everyday.</p>

<p>I have tried to stress to my S that a marriage is something very special, it takes commitment and a lifetime of effort. I have not counseled that he abstain from sex until he marries. Nor would I do so if I had a daughter. I do not see how virginity brings anything to the marriage. </p>

<p>As mythmom related, sometimes even if you think you know a person’s sexual persona before you marry him or her, they can change. But, I still think that on the whole it is better to know where the person is coming from sexually (physically, mentally and emotionally) at the time you are contemplating marriage than to have that an unknown variable.</p>

463

<p>Jolynne:</p>

<p>As I said above, for me morality is a question of “how”, not “whether”. There is a moral question in every sexual relationship, as there is in every non-sexual relationship. How are you treating the other person? Are you being honest? Are you attending to the other’s needs as well as your own? Do you love the other person? Are you living up to the agreements you have made? I want my children – and I want myself – to behave morally in all their relationships. (Which of course doesn’t mean that a relationship never ends, or that mistakes don’t get made. But you deal with that stuff as a good person.)</p>

<p>For me, fidelity within a monogamous relationship is the essence of that. You have a deal with another person, whom you love, cherish, and respect, and you live up to that deal. Most of the time, you don’t dream of NOT living up to it; you can’t imagine anything else. Once in a while . . . well, maybe you do have a notion of not living up to it. But, you don’t act on that.</p>

<p>I understand that for some set of people – not sure whether you are included in it, or whether you’re just playing angel’s advocate here – avoiding any sex before marriage is almost the same thing. It’s a compact with an imaginary future partner that you will “save” yourself for him or her, that you will not violate the exclusivity of your relationship even before it exists. That’s a romantic idea, and I can see the appeal. But ultimately, I think it is sort of narcissistic. Not bad or evil, certainly, but something that’s built around self-regard or personal fantasy (to the extent it’s not letting yourself be defined by the expectations of others).</p>

<p>But, as I said, I haven’t run into people like that much in my life, past the age of 20 or so. And I get upset when I see young people – let’s be honest here, young women – struggling with mounds of guilt for doing exactly what pretty much everyone does, i.e., become sexually active by their early 20s, without getting married. Most of them not as callous, reckless party girls, but in the context of a real attempt to form a long-term, loving relationship, one that may or may not work out, but which is meaningful either way. Or maybe as party girls, but (one hopes) by choice.</p>

<p>I don’t think having sex, or not, makes anyone a bad person per se. I don’t think not having sex makes anyone a better person. Good and bad, better and worse reside in the way in which someone handles the way his or her sexuality affects him- or herself and others, with or without intercourse.</p>

464

<p>Well, I must say I don’t really trust someone who doesn’t like sweets, though I do feel enormously guilty when I eat them.</p>

<p>I’m not sure if indulging or abstaining makes one a better or more moral person.</p>

<p>I do know that when D was a ballet dancer, one blessed with a wonderful metabolism, she got dirty looks when she ate chocolate, which she does almost every day. Cigs are the preference of dancers. Isn’t that sad? Those beautiful arabesques are often bought with such a sad habit.</p>

<p>Wow, my little joke got me way off topic.</p>

<p>Back to sex!</p>

465

<p>Very useful thoughts, 07DAD! Those are important things to consider, certainly. And no one is saying (I think) that reserving sexual intimacy until marriage is a guarantee of a happy, healthy, long-term relationship. As you pointed out, there are so many other factors at play. However, it’s certainly worth considering as an alternative approach to highly-sexualized focus of the prevailing culture. Such an approach – if widely considered as a viable option on par with more promiscuous types of behavior – could prove helpful for girls/guys who might otherwise feel pressured into engaging in behaviors for which they are emotionally/socially/economically unready.</p>

<p>JHS–that’s a very thoughtful and nuanced approach to a complex issue. Sometimes, though, I wonder if your average 17 year old would really have the emotional maturity to both understand and implement that multi-layered analysis (“good and bad…reside in the way someone handles the way his or her sexuality affects him or herself and others…”). There’s something to be said for bright-line rules…if only to put off decisions until the brain/emotional growth catches up with the physical.</p>

<p>I’ve enjoyed this discussion with other thoughtful and articulate parents a lot! </p>

<p>I’ll remember mythmom’s quote which could apply to many things: “joy is a worthier lighthouse than fear.” :-)</p>

466

<ol>
<li><p>Something I meant to say last night, and which goes directly to Jolynne’s comment, is that it was MUCH easier to talk to my kids about what I think is really important if I wasn’t laying down a bright-line rule. I could tell them honestly WHY it was a mistake for me to become sexually active at 16 – not just that I was “immature”, but in exactly what ways I was immature, and how I dealt with things differently as I gained maturity. I know at least one of my kids avoided the main mistakes I made at that age, and I was very happy about that. But it will be years before I really have a complete sense of how my kids handled this transition. Like pretty much everyone else, I can only speak of theory here; experience comes too late and too anecdotally to make a difference.</p></li>
<li><p>If you want to see another completely romantic approach to this whole problem, check out “The Devil’s Playground”, a documentary about an aspect of Amish culture called (I think) rumspringa. For the Amish, much as for ultra-orthodox Jews, every aspect of daily life is infused with religion, and circumscribed by strict, specific religious-based rules, many of which function to require and to reinforce a separation from the outside world. But the Amish are anabaptists; they believe that their way must be freely chosen by adults. Therefore, at (I think) 16, young men and women are completely released from all the strictures of the community, and those strictures are not reimposed on them until they voluntarily choose to join the church. Predictably, many (not all) of them go wild. Alcohol, tobacco, drugs, sex. Heavy metal music! TV! Cars! For the boys, lots of cars – one of the boys in the movie gets a job as a parking attendant, and it’s better than any pornographic fantasy.</p></li>
</ol>

<p>The period tends to last about 12-18 months for girls, and twice that for boys. Most of them join the church, some only after a prolonged absence. Some, never. Since they have not rejected the church, never having joined it, or violated any covenant, they are not shunned by their families and friends; some even live at home, although most don’t. Generally, they rejoin the community in order to get married within it; generally, it’s the young women who make the decision to go back, and who drag their boyfriends along.</p>

<p>I am in awe of the Amish parents: their faith in God, in their community, in the values they have communicated to their kids, permits them to let go of their kids to an extent I can barely imagine, and at an age when I was still driving carpool all the time. But: the parents went through the same coming-of-age process, and likely formed their relationship during it. It’s a lot like college, except without even a veneer of education (although many of the kids do choose to go to community college while they are “out”, and further education is one of the main reasons for kids to stay out longer).</p>

467

<p>JHS raises a very interesting issue of young adults finding their way to faith rather than parents and the religion using the threat of stigma to control conduct.</p>

<p>Another interesting experience is getting outside the US and encountering the lack of body “modesty” found in most Western European and Scandinavian countries’ attitude toward nudity (in person and in art) as well as ideas of the need for and importance of sexual “fidelity.” </p>

<p>S and I repeatedly experienced changing into wetsuits and water gear in outdoor active sports without the benefit of changing rooms. The groups included early 20s to early 30s, males and females, married and single. No big deal to disrobe and change for the Irish, English, Spanish, New Zealanders and two different former Russia republics. Everyone attended to themselves (i.e., not any oogling). No one was the slightest bit embarassed. </p>

<p>On a warm sunny day in Munich, there are office workers sunbathing in the park at lunch sans tops (at least). Scandinavian families with members of all ages roam the nude beaches in the French Caribbean islands.</p>

<p>Australian, Austrian, English and French 30 year olds (including 2 females) asking me in Bolivia during the “Monica” little dress episode why was the US in a twit over what they saw as nothing. The Amsterdam “live” shows are composed of college boyfriend/girlfriend earning tuition money for going “public.” </p>

<p>Jolynne Smyth I believe the problem is that both media marketing and some religious belief systems put a focus and importance on sex way out of proportion with reality. If sex wasn’t so “sexy,” thanks to the moralists, it wouldn’t “sell.” Conversely, if the media didn’t market sexy as a selling point, the moralists wouldn’t have as much ammunition to prove the decay of society. Seriously, it was much more in balance before the late 1960s. Less “flash” and less demagogery (how many more “out-ings” are we going to have to have). </p>

<p>An Icelandic young woman (in 1976) who worked in my restaurant (in Texas)observed of the US “sexual liberation” that it was a joke. She keeningly observed that to be liberated necessarily implied that previously there had been repression/oppression. She noted that the US still worked on the “forbidden fruit” principle and that you aren’t truely liberated until sex, and sexuality, is not associated with issues of “right” and “wrong.”</p>

<p>We (those of us in the USA) seem to think that sex, sexuality and fidelity has an importance that a lot of the world just doesn’t see. BUT, we are the developed country with the highest teen pregnancy rate. And we (the US) are the “new” kid in all this. </p>

<p>Perhaps playing the “morality” card isn’t what keeps sexual conduct in reasonable restraint, but rather it is approaching sexuality as just another among many human characteristics that make up the total person and their experiences that best achieves that result.</p>

<p>This over emphasis on the importance of sex and viewing it as “right” or “wrong” might account for the high correlation between alcohol/drug use and teen and college sex. What would happen if the girls (and guys) didn’t need an excuse for having had sex? Possibly less and sober/responsible sex? That’s an idea!</p>

468

<p>*I believe the problem is that both media marketing and some religious belief systems put a focus and importance on sex way out of proportion with reality. If sex wasn’t so “sexy,” thanks to the moralists, it wouldn’t “sell.”
*</p>

<p>I think they’re in cahoots myself.
things like this really skeeve me out.
[At</a> purity dances, virgin belles ring – chicagotribune.com](<a href=“http://www.chicagotribune.com/services/newspaper/printedition/sunday/chi-purity_bddec02,0,6489657.story?page=1]At”>http://www.chicagotribune.com/services/newspaper/printedition/sunday/chi-purity_bddec02,0,6489657.story?page=1)</p>

469

<p>

This is a very observant and intriguing point. It was hidden at the end of your post, so I just want to highlight it. Good post–all of the issues you touched on certainly deserved mention.</p>

470

<p>One HUGE reason the AMish teens go back home is that they have little education- girls get nothing much beyond 8th grade, and its what they did have wasn’t really at the 8th grade level anyway</p>

<p>Myself, I am NOT in awe of a faith that treats women as second class citizens, gives them little education or life choices</p>

<p>What is pretty prevelant in the Amish community is kids breaking the law- drinking and driving and accidents and such that is often covered up by local authorities</p>

<p>Also, if you DON"T go back, you are basically cut of totally from your family- something I imagine would be hard for a 17 year old with no education</p>

<p>It is no wonder many go back= their options in the English world are minimum</p>

<p>And many are shunned if they don’t join the church</p>

471

<p>Actually I can see a great deal of attraction in the Amish way of living.
Close knit community- great deal of worth and meaning in what they do- I can also see that teens having seen the attractions of malls and shopping and flashy glitter with no substance tire easily of relating to the world in that way.</p>

<p>[NPR</a> : Rumspringa: Amish Teens Venture into Modern Vices](<a href=“http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5455572]NPR”>Rumspringa: Amish Teens Venture into Modern Vices : NPR)</p>

472

<p>“One HUGE reason the Amish teens go back home is that they have little education – girls get nothing much beyond 8th grade, and its what they did have wasn’t really at the 8th grade level anyway. Myself, I am NOT in awe of a faith that treats women as second class citizens, gives them little education or life choices”</p>

<p>It is true that the lack of education influences the choices of Mormon youth. But you have the facts wrong regarding the status of women. They don’t send the young men to high school, either. The culture dictates separate roles for men and women, but the strictures on men are just as tight as the strictures on women. Each gender has a finite set of roles to play at home and a finite list of acceptable jobs they may take elsewhere in the community.</p>

<p>“Also, if you DON"T go back, you are basically cut of totally from your family- something I imagine would be hard for a 17 year old with no education”</p>

<p>Again, this is not correct. The Amish do not shun those who never accepted Baptism and joined the church as adults. This rite of passage usually occurs around the same time as marriage. If you decide not to undergo baptism at all, you can still associate with your family. You have the same status as “English” people do – in other words, you’re decidedly part of the out-group, but friendly relations are not forbidden.</p>

<p>Shunning occurs when someone who has made the decision to join as an adult later leaves the community. Even then, communities and families vary as to how strict the separation from this former member must be. They can’t eat at the same table, they can’t exchange gifts, but they can generally still see one another and talk.</p>

<p>Every Amish and Old Order Mennonite community functions independently, so you may find some crotchety group of exceptions somewhere, but these are the usual rules.</p>

473

<p>Hanna, I asume you meant, Amish, not Mormon?</p>

474

<p>Oh, yes. Thank you. I had Mormonism in my mind because (IMHO) it’s a better example than the Amish of a culture where gender roles are more constrained for women than for men. Amish ordnung (rules) keep <em>everyone</em> in line.</p>

475

<p>Actually, no one in the Amish community has any sort of education after the 8th grade- this include both boys and girls and is known as the “Amish exception.” They are the only group, I believe, that does not have to receive compulsory education until the age of 16.</p>

<p>So yes, while there are definite gender roles within the community, none of them attend school after 8th grade.</p>

476

<p>

A side note, but I assume Native Americans are similarly exempt, though I may be wrong.</p>

477

<p>So, isn’t the legitimate concern the extreme emphasis that is being placed on sex by BOTH “popular culture” and the moralists? </p>

<p>It seems the parents can help their daughter avoid this over-emphasis on sex that fosters both the “girls gone wild” promiscuity to be “with it” trap AND the virginity=moral, sex=immoral trap by dealing with sex as part of their human make up.</p>

<p>As several posters have noted, the “sex is just part of who you are” position allows a parent to counsel appropriate behavoir commensurate with the maturity level of their daughter. It takes the pressure to have sex off the girl who isn’t ready and the pressure to abstain (or sneak or lie) off the girl who is ready. It also would facilitate a more genuine dialogue between the parents and the child on the issue.</p>

478

<p>I found this thread today after reading about Jamie Lynn Spears’ pregnancy. For those who don’t know, Jamie Lynn is a rising tween star, and sister of Britney Spears, who appears on Nickelodeon’s Zoey 101. The sixteen year old “announced” yesterday that she is pregnant. The father is her boyfriend who is nineteen years old. I have read most of the posts in this thread despite it being over 400 posts. I wanted to post some of my thoughts, but please note this isn’t targeting anyone specific, but maybe discussing some of the things I read. I know that everyone has expressed their own view and I am going to express mine.</p>

<p>I am a male who is somewhat religious, but no super devout. In my faith, members are “suppose to” abstain from sexual behavior (incl. intercourse) until marriage. Dating is frowned upon, but in reality it is not a huge issue because children grow-up in a culture where it is not commonplace. Dating is not common because the faith pretty much says that why date if you’re not looking to get married anytime soon (i.e. you’re fourteen, sixteen, whatever). Dating could lead to sex, which could lead to unwanted kids, etc. People looking to wed are typically introduced to other people through family connections. Boys and girls interacting in groups is okay (like “group dating”).</p>

<p>I am not naive. I realize that most people in the US engage in premarital sex when they are of age. I was however surprised that many people in this thread were convinced that very few men are waiting for marriage for reasons other than finding the right person to lose it to or a career. If they were waiting for marriage for some reason it was “bizarre” or “questionable.” </p>

<p>I am waiting for marriage not because I’m in a busy career or I’m waiting for the right person. I’m waiting partly due to my religious beliefs, but also because I know the risks of intercourse, regardless if it’s safe or not. Yes, hopefully most people who engage in intercourse know the risks, and if you want to take them, by all means go ahead. I do not wish to judge.</p>

<p>People were discussing the double standard about it being okay for men to have premarital sex, but virginity being valued in a woman. I think this double standard also comes into play in the case I’m describing. People often don’t think that it’s strange that a woman is virgin, but if a man is a virgin he’s either gay, ugly, or busy with his career. Some posters thought that men could not say no to an offer of sex. I think that’s insulting. Not every man is a “horny horn” and looking to get some.</p>

<p>I guess my point is that I think it’s unfair that men are looked down upon for being virgins or are misunderstood about why they are waiting. I also find it a bit ridiculous when people say if “you make it until your late 20’s” as if we’re all being chased by a succubus who will strip us of our virginity if we don’t run fast enough. In my culture we don’t really worry about losing it because we don’t engage in things like dating. Our marriages still work out fine, of course. I don’t care what other people do with their sex lives, but it saddens me that people can make one’s virginity a “problem.” This is an open discussion on this topic, so I can understand why some people’s opinions came off as overblown, but as adults in society we know what large a role sex plays in our lives, whether it be engaging in it, seeing it, or abstaining from it.</p>

<p>Many posters have given their thoughts on the following, but for those who haven’t, would you find religion to be a surprising reason for a man to wait? Or do you expect a man who is a virgin to have an answer like “waiting for the right person,” “busy with career,” etc?</p>

479

<p>[Devil’s</a> Playground (2002)](<a href=“http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0293088/]Devil’s”>Devil's Playground (2002) - IMDb)</p>

480

<p>NY-AP "Jamie Lynn Spears, the 16-year-old “Zoey 101” star and sister of Britney, told OK! magazine that she’s pregnant and that the father is her boyfriend, Casey Aldridge.</p>

<p>“It was a shock for both of us, so unexpected,” she said. “I was in complete and total shock and so was he.”</p>

<p>What message does she want to send to other teens about premarital sex? “I definitely don’t think it’s something you should do; it’s better to wait,” she told the magazine. “But I can’t be judgmental because it’s a position I put myself in.”</p>

<p>What bothers me is that anyone who is having sex can be in “complete and total shock” about getting pregnant. Pregnancy is now seen as a “failure of birth control,” not the natural result of sex. People used to know where babies came from. </p>

<p>BRAVE, I hear you. There are many cultures where there is no “dating” as we know it. Some religious people I know practice “courtship” where the young man first approaches the young woman’s parents, informs them of his intentions to (possibly) marry their daughter and asks permission to see her. Some of H’s co-workers are muslims in arranged marriages. Are their marriages less happy or less enduring? Having a series of relationships before marriage probably isn’t very good “training” for fidelity in marriage. Maybe this explains our high divorce rate. Everyone does not have the same idea of what marriage is about. Some cultures emphasize finding a faithful and compatible partner to have and raise children with, and see sex as a smaller part of the picture–after all, 99% of marriage is spent “not having sex.” </p>

<p>So, virgins don’t bring “experience” with them into their marriage. They don’t bring baggage from past relationships or STDs, either. Apparently in all cultures and all times (and even before sex ed) --people who married as virgins figured things out pretty quickly.</p>