Saving first kiss question

[Rau]

That’s what confuses me- if kissing is so intimate that someone wants to wait until their wedding day to do it, then why would they be okay with doing things they viewed as more intimate than that, whatever those things are? It sounds perfectly legitimate for the boyfriend to be confused.

It’s not so intimate. As the OP notes, she is saving it on the basis of a childhood notion, something “cute and sweet”. It seems quite arbitrary. It is not an act of purity, or a bid to remain chaste, or anything of that kind. The BF ultimately has to respect her choice, but is free to point to the apparent arbitrariness of it and seek to discuss it with her.

 

[Mulligan2]

This seems a rather arbitrary position. You don’t have any moral objections to kissing outside of marriage, yet you are ‘saving’ your first kiss for your wedding day? Abstaining from sex is different, and we do this not because we are ‘saving’ this to give to our true love on our wedding day, but because sex outside marriage is morally wrong (unlike kissing outside of marriage). To me you are basing this not on moral grounds, but on a rather romantic notion.

Men are generally not very romantic, so the fact that you have saved your first kiss for your wedding day is unlikely to thrill your husband, although it will most likely have been the cause of much frustration to him while he was your fiance.

I would also suggest that her “saving the first kiss” notion may actually delay or prevent her from ever getting married. I can’t imagine her boyfriend viewing her notion as “principled.” I would imagine her boyfriend views her position as “quaint” at best, and perhaps even views it as “odd and nonsensical.” She’s entitled to live her life as she sees fit. But it is probably unrealistic of her to think her boyfriend would be supportive of this.

 

[thewanderer]

I would also suggest that her “saving the first kiss” notion may actually delay or prevent her from ever getting married. I can’t imagine her boyfriend viewing her notion as “principled.” I would imagine her boyfriend views her position as “quaint” at best, and perhaps even views it as “odd and nonsensical.” She’s entitled to live her life as she sees fit. But it is probably unrealistic of her to think her boyfriend would be supportive of this.

Well, that depends, there are guys who get all into this idea as well, its not just something women find appealing, but it is also true that there are many wonderful people who find this idea silly and nonsensical which can cause frustration as they are told to follow arbitrary unilateral rules about what kinds of affection is ok within their relationship. It seems to me like the OP’s boyfriend falls into this latter category. I do agree that there are likely many more who find it silly than who agree with it (and I’m still talking about the group of wonderful catholic men, not going anywhere near the unchaste men), meaning it is an issue which is more likely to cause friction in an otherwise great relationship than not. Whether the friction is worth it or not is something the OP has to decide for herself.

 

[Mulligan2]

Well, that depends, there are guys who get all into this idea as well, its not just something women find appealing, but it is also true that there are many wonderful people who find this idea silly and nonsensical which can cause frustration as they are told to follow arbitrary unilateral rules about what kinds of affection is ok within their relationship. It seems to me like the OP’s boyfriend falls into this latter category. I do agree that there are likely many more who find it silly than who agree with it (and I’m still talking about the group of wonderful catholic men, not going anywhere near the unchaste men), meaning it is an issue which is more likely to cause friction in an otherwise great relationship than not. Whether the friction is worth it or not is something the OP has to decide for herself.

Agreed.

 

[Brendan_64]

And what is the motivation behind this? For whose benefit is this being done? For God, for her future spouse, or for herself?

 

[runningdude]

I would also suggest that her “saving the first kiss” notion may actually delay or prevent her from ever getting married. I can’t imagine her boyfriend viewing her notion as “principled.” I would imagine her boyfriend views her position as “quaint” at best, and perhaps even views it as “odd and nonsensical.” She’s entitled to live her life as she sees fit. But it is probably unrealistic of her to think her boyfriend would be supportive of this.

Any guy willing to put up with the messiness and uncertainty of Natural Family Planning, etc, would likely be willing to wait a few months until they are married to kiss. Saving the first kiss may actually be a good litmus test for fidelity to all Catholic teaching in this regard.

This of course requires the OP to be actively discerning marriage. The “boyfriend” should be in a position to support her and their future child immediately, else marriage is ill advised. Serious dating while not ready to marry, is probably ill advised as well.

 

[Brendan_64]

Any guy willing to put up with the messiness and uncertainty of Natural Family Planning, etc, would likely be willing to wait a few months until they are married to kiss.

A few months?

Most engagements I know of last for a few years. Engagement is meant to be a time of discernment, a time to assess you are completely sure that committing your life to this person is the right thing to do. In my opinion, an engagement that lasts only a few months is very risky.

 

[AllSeasons]

I think some of the previous posts indicating that a kiss should be expected exhibit the sense of entitlement that is so rampant in our society today. It’s all about me, me, me, and they never stop for a second and think about what it means for the other person. The OP has indicated clearly that this is her wish, and yet it feels like most people (guys) are saying she’s wrong. Personally, I find that demeaning, and it indicates a severe lack of respect for someone’s personal wishes.

I think some of the objections perhaps comes from personal experiences of some of the posters. Perhaps they were rejected when they made advances that the woman did not want, and they’re trying to justify it here on the forums. This really shouldn’t happen, and I hope other posters will guard against the urge to do so.

 

[Rau]

Most engagements I know of last for a few years. Engagement is meant to be a time of discernment, a time to assess you are completely sure that committing your life to this person is the right thing to do. In my opinion, an engagement that lasts only a few months is very risky.

The period of courting may last a few years, but engagements, in my observation, are typically 9-12 months, sometimes less, sometimes longer.

 

[Rau]

I think some of the previous posts indicating that a kiss should be expected exhibit the sense of entitlement that is so rampant in our society today. It’s all about me, me, me, and they never stop for a second and think about what it means for the other person. The OP has indicated clearly that this is her wish, and yet it feels like most people (guys) are saying she’s wrong. Personally, I find that demeaning, and it indicates a severe lack of respect for someone’s personal wishes.

I think some of the objections perhaps comes from personal experiences of some of the posters. Perhaps they were rejected when they made advances that the woman did not want, and they’re trying to justify it here on the forums. This really shouldn’t happen, and I hope other posters will guard against the urge to do so.

I think this view may be a it of a stretch. I haven’t read anyone deny the OP’s right to keep her lips away from his, or to declare her “wrong”. Your second para is outrageous speculation, and demeans those to whom you refer.

The OP’s position is certainly unusual, and somewhat arbitrary, but is her right. I can understand a bf being less than 100% comfortable with it.

 

[felsguy]

Seems fairly simple to me. As long as the boyfriend is okay with it, everything’s fine …although he may ask you “any other promises I should know about?”. And if he’s not okay with it, then you can kiss him goodbye…on the cheek!

 

[VeritasLuxMea]

Any guy willing to put up with the messiness and uncertainty of Natural Family Planning, etc, would likely be willing to wait a few months until they are married to kiss. Saving the first kiss may actually be a good litmus test for fidelity to all Catholic teaching in this regard.

This of course requires the OP to be actively discerning marriage. The “boyfriend” should be in a position to support her and their future child immediately, else marriage is ill advised. Serious dating while not ready to marry, is probably ill advised as well.

So all we’re looking for is a man that:

1. A good and faithful Catholic,
2. Is rich enough to financially support her and a child immediately,
3. That is willing to be in a relationship for more than a year without kissing, not because of any religious reasons, really, but just because of her own pride and as a “test” (because Lord knows that men find it endearing when women “test” them for no reason)

Shouldn’t be a problem. There’s a guy like that right around every corner.
AllSeason:

think some of the previous posts indicating that a kiss should be expected exhibit the sense of entitlement that is so rampant in our society today. It’s all about me, me, me, and they never stop for a second and think about what it means for the other person. The OP has indicated clearly that this is her wish, and yet it feels like most people (guys) are saying she’s wrong. Personally, I find that demeaning, and it indicates a severe lack of respect for someone’s personal wishes.

So it’s fine for her to have the wish to not kiss him, but not fine for him to wish to kiss her? Huh?

 

[Lorelei12]

I think some of the previous posts indicating that a kiss should be expected exhibit the sense of entitlement that is so rampant in our society today. It’s all about me, me, me, and they never stop for a second and think about what it means for the other person. The OP has indicated clearly that this is her wish, and yet it feels like most people (guys) are saying she’s wrong. Personally, I find that demeaning, and it indicates a severe lack of respect for someone’s personal wishes.

I think some of the objections perhaps comes from personal experiences of some of the posters. Perhaps they were rejected when they made advances that the woman did not want, and they’re trying to justify it here on the forums. This really shouldn’t happen, and I hope other posters will guard against the urge to do so.

I don’t think anyone said it was wrong. The OP herself said she wasn’t exactly sure whether she really wanted this or was just trying to stick to some rule she imposed on herself years ago. If she doesn’t want to kiss him, for whatever reason, that’s fine. But she also shouldn’t be doing “other stuff” that confuses her boyfriend. Nor is it wrong for her boyfriend to want to kiss her and decide that he’d rather break things off than be sent mixed messages.

 

[Brendan_64]

I think some of the previous posts indicating that a kiss should be expected exhibit the sense of entitlement that is so rampant in our society today.

Nobody is suggesting this at all.

I It’s all about me, me, me, and they never stop for a second and think about what it means for the other person.

This cuts both ways. It could be argued that not wanting to kiss before your wedding day, not on moral grounds, but because of a personal ‘test’ based on a childhood notion that you find ‘cute and sweet’ is quite self-focused, and is in itself rather “me, me, me”.

The OP has indicated clearly that this is her wish, and yet it feels like most people (guys) are saying she’s wrong.

And what is wrong with holding an opinion that this is not the most sensible thing to do? It does seem a rather self-indulgent notion.

Personally, I find that demeaning, and it indicates a severe lack of respect for someone’s personal wishes.

You are of course entitled to hold that view, as are others entitled to disagree with you.

I think some of the objections perhaps comes from personal experiences of some of the posters. Perhaps they were rejected when they made advances that the woman did not want, and they’re trying to justify it here on the forums. This really shouldn’t happen, and I hope other posters will guard against the urge to do so.

That last paragraph is pure prejudice and nothing anyone has posted would indicate anything to substantiate this prejudiced remark. Are you attempting to play a card to which you feel nobody can reply to without being deemed as someone who makes unwanted advances on women and gets rejected as a result?

 

[thewanderer]

Any guy willing to put up with the messiness and uncertainty of Natural Family Planning, etc, would likely be willing to wait a few months until they are married to kiss. Saving the first kiss may actually be a good litmus test for fidelity to all Catholic teaching in this regard.

This of course requires the OP to be actively discerning marriage. The “boyfriend” should be in a position to support her and their future child immediately, else marriage is ill advised. Serious dating while not ready to marry, is probably ill advised as well.

Again, no no no no no no no. Being willing to wait til marriage to kiss has nothing to do with how good a Catholic a person is. This is a terrible way to try and separate the “good” guys from those who won’t followChurch teaching. Again, meand my husband both disagreed withtheidea of waiting until marriage to kiss, we both think it is silly and both disagreed with iton principle, but you would be hard pressed to find a man more willing to follow Church teaching about contraception and NFP. By claiming that being happy to wait u until marriage to kiss is a good litmus test you are prematurely judging men like my husband as being bad people who would drag you away from the faith, when inreality nothing could be further from the truth.

 

[thewanderer]

I think some of the previous posts indicating that a kiss should be expected exhibit the sense of entitlement that is so rampant in our society today. It’s all about me, me, me, and they never stop for a second and think about what it means for the other person. The OP has indicated clearly that this is her wish, and yet it feels like most people (guys) are saying she’s wrong. Personally, I find that demeaning, and it indicates a severe lack of respect for someone’s personal wishes.

I think some of the objections perhaps comes from personal experiences of some of the posters. Perhaps they were rejected when they made advances that the woman did not want, and they’re trying to justify it here on the forums. This really shouldn’t happen, and I hope other posters will guard against the urge to do so.

Seeing as my posts have been the harshest on here against her idea of waiting I think I should point out that I am a happily married woman who has only ever dated two guys, both of whom weretheones to initiate the first kiss. So as you can see your theory that I’m. A selfish guy who has tried to kiss others solely for my own pleasure and been rejected who is now trying to justify unselfish and immoral is just a tad off-base. I’m not going to post it again as imona mobile and soit would be hard to copy it and link it I highly suggest you go back to my earlier post where I quote the Cathecism of the Catholic Church on our responsibility as Catholics to avoid rash judgement.

 

[Rau]

I don’t think anyone said it was wrong. The OP herself said she wasn’t exactly sure whether she really wanted this or was just trying to stick to some rule she imposed on herself years ago. If she doesn’t want to kiss him, for whatever reason, that’s fine. But she also shouldn’t be doing “other stuff” that confuses her boyfriend. Nor is it wrong for her boyfriend to want to kiss her and decide that he’d rather break things off than be sent mixed messages.

The fact that “the other stuff” happens and is ok really highlights the arbitrariness of the OP’s prohibition on kissing on the lips. It would have made far more sense if this had been something they’d jointly decided.