Dating a potential non-virgin

[Billy76]

How ridiculous. He does not “need counseling” because he wants to date virgins. Remaining chaste and celibate until marriage shows personal restraint, devotion to God, and discipline. All of which is extremely important to marriage.

 

[Lara]

A virgin would have no trouble telling a good Catholic in a dating setting that he or she is a virgin if it were the prevailing moral standard even among Catholics. It is something one should be PROUD of. But as you see in this post, it is NOT the prevailing moral standard for many Catholics.

Naturally, being good sets you up for criticism from all the proud Catholics who can’t humbly admit that their premarital sexual encounters damaged them and will tell you that YOU are judgemental before they will repent and change their opinions.

 

[Lara]

No IF it is question about someone’s past in right and non-judgemental manner of knowing each other on way to marriage. OP asks different things than that.

Your comment is judgemental. It turns out that people are determined by mistakes and that because of their past they remain the same at the core even though they change lives.

Lara:

You might have a point that we don’t necessarily want to treat people as “damaged goods” after they have had intentional premarital sex, despite it being true in many cases.

No, it is not true that sinners are damaged goods which cannot change.

I’ve waged my whole sex life on a lie.

It seems like that.

That’s an unfair extraction of what I said. The full quote was: “If no Catholic can honour this, he or she might decide, what the hell?, I’ve waged my whole sex life on a lie.”

 

[Inbonum]

Naturally, being good sets you up for criticism from all the proud Catholics who can’t humbly admit that their premarital sexual encounters damaged them and will tell you that YOU are judgemental before they will repent and change their opinions.

I am not proud of my sins but of Jesus who forgave me and gave me new life.
My sins did not damage me.

Some didn’t have premarital sex but have judged, gossiped, abandoned others and been unmerciful to sinners.

 

[FiveLinden]

There is always a risk that an STD has been acquired from previous relationships. So it is good to know that any party with whom you are having unprotected intercourse has been tested, unless of course, they are a virgin. This is particularly important for Catholics who do not intend to use measure that protect against STDs because of their contraceptive effect.

So while I would have no concern whatsoever about the sexual history of a partner I would, especially if we were to have unprotected sex, be concerned about the possibility of an STD. On the other hand given my continuing relationship of several decades such a situation is unlikely to arise.

 

[T432]

OP, I think you have the right to have your own dealbreakers about the woman you would like to marry.

I think virginity is a beautiful gift to bring to a marriage but it is only ONE gift. There are many others and virginity by itself does not necessarily define someone’s suitability to marriage and being a mature, supportive wife to you.

If it turns out she isn’t a virgin and she isn’t for you it sounds like this girl is on a path NOW to make a excellent Catholic wife to a Catholic husband one day.

 

[Billy76]

I am not saying that no one should date a non-virgin but at the same time we all as individuals have different needs and wants in a spouse. If a woman wants a very devout and faithful man who never has watched porn or masturbated I think that is fine. It is not a condemnation on the man but rather the two are not compatible

 

[Lara]

That doesn’t even make sense. A guy wants to marry a virgin and suddenly becomes unready for a serious relationship with a real woman? Are you suggesting virgins are that rare, like unicorns?

 

[DeniseNY]

You might have a point that we don’t necessarily want to treat people as “damaged goods” after they have had intentional premarital sex, despite it being true in many cases.

People are not goods. Virginity is not a commodity.

How is it true that someone is "damaged goods’ if he/she is not a virgin?

 

[RolandThompsonGunner]

I think if God can forgive mortal sins, we can probably manage the same.

This is a good thing to remember, but we also have to bear in mind that if your spouse slept with someone else years before you even met, you have nothing to “forgive.” It’s not an offense against you. They had no obligation to you at that time. They still sinned against God and need to be forgiven by Him, but the marriage vows aren’t somehow retroactive.

 

[Billy76]

I am not saying it makes them less moral. I think virginity is a great gift to ones spouse and shows very strong character traits that to me is very important. When you get married, you are married for life, so wanting someone who takes sexual morality and has taken sexual morality seriously their entire life is not something that is wrong to look for in a spouse. It may not be important to you. That is fine. But trying to say others can’t find it important is ridiculous.

 

[CTBcin]

I used the term “damaged goods” as how we should not view people who have sinned sexually in the past. It’s a pretty demeaning thing to call someone. And yet, some people seem to be taking that up to describe those who have fallen in purity. Which is definitely telling…

 

[CTBcin]

Absolutely. Women definitely seem to be unfairly held to a different standard, which is definitely a problem in issues like this.

 

[Billy76]

Not really. Women can turn men down for the same reason you know. Had the OP been a woman, I would still think it is okay not to date someone of they are not a virgin.

 

[Peeps]

Why would he need counseling?

Talking things over with someone older and wiser is almost always a good thing and helpful. It’s not that he “needs” counselling, but that it might help him to work through any issues and set his mind at ease about courting potential brides.

I am a older woman, and I may be wrong, but the impression that I am receiving from this young poster is that he has an idea that virgins are somehow more “holy” and “spiritual” than a woman who is not a virgin. I don’t think this is true, although I could be wrong. At any rate, it sets both the young man and any future wife up for disappointment, as even virgins have their share of faults and flaws.

I can think of other “darker” reasons why the young man is actually coming to an online forum to ask “how could I potentially get over this fact?”

I found that question a little odd and it rang an alarm bell in my mind.

But then, I could be wrong and making too big a deal out of his questions. I’m not a young Catholic man, so perhaps all young Catholic men have the same question and their mothers and fathers deal with it calmly. (I also did not raise sons, but daughters.)

At any rate, talking things over with an older and wiser person, especially a priest, is a good thing for a younger man who is seeking to find a good wife and have a long and happy marriage. If for some reason the priest (or other older man) feels that actual counselling from a professional is called for, he can let the young man know.

 

[CTBcin]

Women can turn men down for the same reason you know. Had the OP been a woman, I would still think it is okay not to date someone of they are not a virgin.

I know. However, these types of conversations anecdotally speaking, whether it be here on the forums or elsewhere, tend to focus on and obsess over women’s purity inordinately to the exclusion of men’s purity.

 

[Bernoulli]

However, these types of conversations anecdotally speaking, whether it be here on the forums or elsewhere, tend to focus on and obsess over women’s purity inordinately to the exclusion of men’s purity.

There’s a scientific reason for men to value women’s sexual purity: paternity uncertainty.

 

[Billy76]

Maybe women don’t care about purity as much or are less vocal about it? I am not sure. It’s just funny whenever someone has a dealbreaker they don’t agree with they use sexism as an excuse to demonize it. Height seems to be a deal breaker for many women, is that sexist of women? I don’t think so.

 

[MNathaniel]

Maybe women don’t care about purity as much or are less vocal about it? I am not sure. It’s just funny whenever someone has a dealbreaker they don’t agree with they use sexism as an excuse to demonize it. Height seems to be a deal breaker for many women, is that sexist of women? I don’t think so.

And may the men be as upfront in rejecting non-virgins as the women are in rejecting short men. Haha.

I’ve said it upthread and I’ll say it again: I’d be delighted if a date told me he only wants to marry a virgin. That’d save me a lot of discernment time with him, and we could just break it off then and there. He can carry on looking for his virgin, and I can carry on looking for someone I’m more interested in too.

(PS honestly, I’m not knocking virgins and those who manage to find each other. It’s a beautiful thing, and very sweet. It’s just that for the many people out there who simply can no longer check that box, I think it’s handy for everybody if the dealbreaker comes out early, so everyone can walk apart peacefully, rather than after getting more emotionally attached.)

 

[CTBcin]

There’s a scientific reason for men to value women’s sexual purity: paternity uncertainty.

And? In our lives as Christians, both men and women are called to equally called to purity.

Height seems to be a deal breaker for many women, is that sexist of women? I don’t think so.

Don’t be ridiculous. Different people have different physical aspects that they find attractive, both men and women. But that is irrelevant to this conversation.