The way he positioned it, wondering if she is UNFIT to be a mother?
He asked the question - nothing more. I gave him the benefit of the doubt and took his question as being an honest one.
And the fact that he clearly does not have a strong emotional bond with the girl in the first place. He might has well have been asking if we would advise buying a magazine off the rack if someone had folded the corner down. This is a human being for crying out loud, not a piece of merchandise! Perhaps he is just not mature enough for courtship, or maybe he just doesn’t really love this particular girl, or maybe he’s more fit for the contemplative cloistered life. At any rate, “being a jerk” is an fairly accurate description.
This is not charitable. If he didn’t have a strong emotional bond with her, do you think he’d be going through a grief cycle?
By the time I hit my late '20s all the normal Catholic guys were married and only the creepy ones with Madonna/whore issues were left.
This is neither charitable nor true - a sweeping generalization like that isn’t going to help your argument.
"I am good because I have this degree and will make a good provider; she is bad because she is “damaged goods.”
That’s your interpretation, and not a very charitable one. Men are supposed to be providers - that’s their job. Why bash him for saying that? He never said that she was bad or “damaged goods” - I think that’s you wanting him to believe that more than him actually believing/thinking that.
Unfortunately, Madonna/Whore can be a common issue among devout Catholic men. It’s a huge problem in Italy, to the point where after childbirth, some men refuse to sleep with their wives (Madonna) and instead take on mistresses (Whore). And somehow they don’t see he contradiction between this behavior and their Catholic faith!
This isn’t true. It affects less than 1% of 1% of Catholic men in Italy. Please do not spread misinformation regardless of whether it helps your case or not. There was a study done on this in 2002.
Has no one ever heard this euphemism before? It refers to someone who’s lost their virginity. If everyone were a little more charitable, perhaps we could see a positive interpretation of the OP’s words instead of seeing a negative one because we don’t like his choices.
It seems as if you must have been leading a very sheltered existence if you think you can meet an attractive and mentally stable woman who has never made any mistakes in her past.
How do you equate virginity with “never made any mistakes”? Also, leading a sheltered existence is a valid reason for being shocked by it. It’s no different from a person who lives in a very secular environment and having their views and ideals shaped by it (including, possibly, propensity towards certain sins). We grant leniency for the latter case - why not the former?
The OP said nothing about this, but if someone has committed masturbation, then he has not saved himself for marriage either.
This not correct. The absence of sexual relations with another person is the definition of “saving yourself for marriage.”
I’m not sure where my self-esteem would be if I began to encounter Catholic men who would react with, well…judgement just short of abject horror. I’d be beyond crushed and probably wouldn’t want to date anymore. That I wasn’t good enough…nor would I ever be good enough because I was “damaged goods” and no one would want me.
It’s worth repeating that different people react differently to different sexual pasts. Of course, the OP did not react in a kind way (though he does recognize that), but the concern over a sexual past is an appropriate feeling. Judgment, for the record, is saying “this person is a bad person for their sin(s)” - saying “this person is not the right person for me” is not judgmental. I don’t think bringing the tired “damaged goods” statement is helpful here - unless of course we interpret the OPs comments in a negative light and consider them to be rhetorical questions.
Beyond that, and slightly related, I’ve noticed some level of pride in people who brag about being able to overlook or accept more - that is not in the Christian spirit, and is no different from a person who says they are, as a virgin, better than a non-virgin (or whichever binary quality you can think of).
I think, in the end, the negative views of the OP only snowballed - that is, there were some things we didn’t like, so we decided to interpret everything about the OP in a negative way. This is not the right way to do things. Also, setting the OP’s girlfriend up as the exact opposite of the OP is not appropriate or sustainable, since we don’t know the whole story.
+Sebastian
