leadership from the top down an it seems the Church is behind the 8 ball since at least the 21st century to try an start fixing it, society in general outside the faith seems to also only target women that their virginity is special, I can not even begin to start referencing commercials I have seen in my life growing up which showed young women explaining why " no means no " that a female has the right to say " no ".
Church leadership will always be behind. The belief seems to be that it’s easier to accept the aftermath of something, than to prevent it in the first place (which, to me, comes across as something akin to modern Corporatism - e.g. paying off the victims due to poorly designed products is easier/cheaper than designing a better product.) I think it also stems from the so-called “purity culture” which labels women as being (essentially) “innocent targets” of “predatorial, sex-crazed” men.
and do not get me wrong that message did needed to be expressed, but where are the same commercials targeting young men that it is okay to at the very least wait to have sex when they are ready and mature enough to understand what the act really is …
I don’t know. I think it’s the “double standard” - it’s likely just as much a curse on men as it is women (but both live by it, anyway, it seems).
If the Church does not do more to emphasize the importance of male virginity then I do not see how it is possible for a young man or any man to take seriously why their virginity is important in any shape or form.
If you were to do a poll of young men and women, and you were to ask each person: “Is virginity in your spouse important?” you would find that men would be far more likely to say “yes,” and women far more likely to say “no.” The results would be predictable, and it is their predictability that seems to lead men to believe their virginity is /not/ important, and thus for them to do little or nothing to maintain it. In fact, there are enough Catholic women unnattracted to/undesirous of male virginity that some men could very well feel virginity to be a liability, and to “do away with it.” The outcome is seen as such: there is very little disadvantage, and a potential gain (at least just in that dimension). Their regret after the fact could very well be unexpected. Obviously, from the observer’s point-of-view, that thinking is foolish, but it wouldn’t surprise me if it were common. Besides that, I suppose there are men who simply don’t think about their future spouse, and wouldn’t be making calculations either way.
Anyways, it is my opinion that virginity in and of itself is not valuable, but rather the spirituality that underlies it. For example, I don’t see anything inherently “valuable” about the virginity of some 40-year-old guy that’s been living in his parent’s basement eating hot pockets for two decades and is too lazy to get a job or a life. It’s an entirely different story if we’re dealing with a person remaining celibate before marriage, or is becoming a holy person (priest, nun, etc.).
Are you confusing valuable with virtuous? Also, why do people always cite the 40-year-old-guy-in-his-parents-basement example when discussing virginity? (specifically in the “I don’t think it’s important” sense)
Virginity in and of itself is valuable regardless of the spirituality that underlies it or doesn’t underlie it. That being said, virginity is only given the crown when it is deliberately undertaken and preserved for the sake of the Kingdom. If a basement virgin makes it to Heaven but their virginity was not a deliberate resolve for the sake of the Kingdom, then they will be rewarded for their chastity but not for virginity. Remember, virginity is a virtue, and as such, must fulfill the requirements for a virtue to take place. I feel it might be easier to equate the priesthood with virginity when talking about value. The priesthood, in and of itself, is valuable, regardless of how holy or sinful a priest is. The same for virginity. It is valuable regardless of the personal morality of the virgin.
I think, in general, people are not going to be very receptive to the Church’s teaching on virginity precisely because so few people maintain it (I speak of the “never marrieds”). I think it’s analogous to wealth - (proportionally) few people are wealthy, and those that aren’t are inclined to be critical of them (e.g. “they didn’t earn that wealth”). The parallels are quite interesting.
+Sebastian
This plays into vocations as well. People want to make priesthood & consecrated life on the same level as lay life because they don’t want “elite” vocations where there is true inequality of state. But the reality is that the states are unequal and people are unequal. People are equal only in that they equally share the dignity due to a human being. But they all have different strengths and weaknesses and callings. Ultimately, all of us who make it to Heaven will be unequal in Heaven too. Our degree of glory will depend on the level of charity we have achieved here on earth. Mary had the highest level of any human being, which is why she enjoys God the most in Heaven.