Should I go to a sleepover with guys and girls?

[TheRealJuliane]

A sleep over, as in everyone brings over sleeping bags, watch scary movies as a group and talk endlessly for hours, spin the bottle, if it is mostly or all girls toss in at least one pillow fight.

That is, when you are 11 years old…

For 20 somethings, it’s usually a little more than that…

OK, a LOT more than that.

 

[Baelor]

I mean, seriously, what group of 20 somethings gets together for a “sleepover?” You KNOW the end game is sex!

That is not necessarily true. I know groups of people who do that because they enjoy spending time together playing games, watching movies, etc. Sometimes they cook breakfast together the next morning!

 

[Young_Thinker]

That is not necessarily true. I know groups of people who do that because they enjoy spending time together playing games, watching movies, etc. Sometimes they cook breakfast together the next morning!

How cute! However, even if it is perfectly innocent, a coed. sleepover still doesn’t quite “look right!”

 

[DexUK]

It seems to me that there’s a fair amount of presumption going on on this thread. Not every mixed gathering needs to turn into an orgy. In fact I’d be astonished if all but a tiny percentage ever did. Why is it not possible that by being in a big group of friends that they don’t all act as chaperones for each other by default?

It looks like a young person can’t win: he/she can’t be alone with a single person of the opposite gender in case something nefarious happens and can’t be with a group of people in case something even more nefarious happens! He or she might as well just lock themselves in an ivory tower until they day they die! Why do people think that other people simply can’t control themselves? I know I can, and I don’t think I’m unusual!!

1ke had it right. Prudential judgement is key. If you know that this bunch of people are liable as a group to do the wrong thing, then obviously don’t go. If you don’t have any particular reason to expect misbehaviour, then go, be sensible and enjoy yourself!

 

[Catholic90]

No. All I ever hear about these things is that couples pair off, go into a room and have sex. It might not happen right away, but in the wee hours, it happens. There can be drinking and/or drugs too.

I mean, seriously, what group of 20 somethings gets together for a “sleepover?” You KNOW the end game is sex!

Not all groups of young people act this way. My sons group sure does not.

 

[Catholic90]

That is not necessarily true. I know groups of people who do that because they enjoy spending time together playing games, watching movies, etc. Sometimes they cook breakfast together the next morning!

Yep - this is what my son and his friends do.

 

[JimG]

No. All I ever hear about these things is that couples pair off, go into a room and have sex. It might not happen right away, but in the wee hours, it happens. There can be drinking and/or drugs too.

I mean, seriously, what group of 20 somethings gets together for a “sleepover?” You KNOW the end game is sex!

I thought that sleepovers were for kids. But isn’t the saying that 60 is the new 40, and 30 is the new 13?

 

[jill316]

Thank you all for your various responses. Perhaps I should have been more clear about my question.
First, I was not asking for a poll on whether sleepovers are still socially acceptable after the age of 20. Many of you have advised that I should not go because sleepovers are immature, cheesy, and a waste of time for grown adults (a perfect example being Young Thinker’s sarcastic response, “How cute! However, even if it is perfectly innocent, a coed. sleepover still doesn’t quite “look right!””). While I respect your social standards, this simply was not the question I was asking. I was asking how likely it would be for a sin to be committed if I went on the sleepover.
Second, I should clarify that, based on my knowledge of the type of people that will be at the sleepover and the type of atmosphere to expect, I am fully confident that there will be no sex or inappropriate contact, and very little drinking. (If my expectations turn out to be wrong, I am planning to leave promptly.) Many of you have advised that I should not go because the purpose of most sleepovers is to have sex (the perfect example being TheRealJuliane’s surmisement, “I mean, seriously, what group of 20 somethings gets together for a “sleepover?” You KNOW the end game is sex!” Others of you pointed out very nicely in response that sleepovers that do not end in sex are in fact very common. My “prudential judgment” for this particular sleepover is that I won’t have to worry about sex or inappropriate contact taking place (and again, if I am wrong, I will leave).
With this being said, since I am not concerned about sex and heavy drinking on this sleepover, I want to clarify the type of sin that I am concerned about. I am wondering whether guys are more prone to lustful desires during (“innocent”) co-ed sleepovers. I am worried that, even though there will be no sex, some guys will be more likely to consent to impure thoughts and desires because of the girls there. I am willing to make the sacrifice and not go in order to decrease the chances of a sin being committed; but I feel like maybe I am being overscrupulous, and maybe I should just go, and trust that the guys are mature and respectable enough not to succumb to such thoughts.

 

[DexUK]

Do guys think lustfully of every woman who crosses their path? Are they completely incapable of controlling themselves when in a social situation with women?

If that were the case, social interaction between the genders would be sexual anarchy. Now while there are people who might suggest that that has already happened, I would suggest that that’s probably a bit of a hysterical response.

If you feel that you’re responsible for someone else’s lustful thoughts just by being there, then, as I said earlier, you might as well lock yourself in an ivory tower for all eternity, since there’s no practical way you can prevent yourself being seen by another man and thereby representing an occasion of sin for him.

Thankfully though we’re not expected to go to such extremes. You’re talking about going to a communal event whereby everyone will have the chance to get together and be sociable in what sounds like a very loving - but NOT SEXUAL - responsible context. If a lustful thought crosses the mind of one of the people there I’d say the risk is as much that such a thought would happen as if they saw an attractive person while in a shopping mall or at a swimming pool. I’d have said pools were MORE risky, given the state of undress necessary for that activity, but nobody seems to object to people going swimming in pools or in the sea.

I think you’re seriously over-thinking it. You say your friends are responsible and you don’t expect any ‘funny business’. You can’t help someone else’s unbidden thoughts, but in a group situation with other responsible people, the chances of acting on those thoughts are vastly reduced.

Go to this thing. Have fun! Don’t stress about it!

 

[carn]

I am willing to make the sacrifice and not go in order to decrease the chances of a sin being committed;

The chances of that sin being commited is in my eyes not influenced much by being present or absent.
Men being together with female → chance they are attracted to her, …
Men being alone → chance they discuss which female they are atrracted to, …

In my eyes the chance for lustfull thoughts is lower in presence of women, because most men are somewhat used to control their thoughts around women, who are not interested, so they do not act in any offensive way.
(Of course chance for something actually happening increases with presence of women, but you asked for the problem of thoughts.)

but I feel like maybe I am being overscrupulous, and maybe I should just go, and trust that the guys are mature and respectable enough not to succumb to such thoughts.

Do not have scrupules about that as long as you wear something resembling clothes, there is nothing more women can do, as men tend to such thoughts anyway. As i heard it once a cynical way:
“How do you determine, whether a man is in principle interested in and ready for sex?”
“Check if he is breathing.”

 

[1ke]

I want to clarify the type of sin that I am concerned about. I am wondering whether guys are more prone to lustful desires during (“innocent”) co-ed sleepovers. I am worried that, even though there will be no sex, some guys will be more likely to consent to impure thoughts and desires because of the girls there. I am willing to make the sacrifice and not go in order to decrease the chances of a sin being committed; but I feel like maybe I am being overscrupulous, and maybe I should just go, and trust that the guys are mature and respectable enough not to succumb to such thoughts.

Well, men having lustful thoughts (or women) can happen on a crowded city bus or subway. Does that mean riding the bus is immoral?

Simply *being *in a group of people is not sinful, and you are worried about other people’s **potential **sins-- so I would say that is scrupulous.

OTOH, the women must act modestly around the men (and vice versa), and I would say the time when this would come into play would be when people are getting ready for bed or getting up in the morning. So, that would be the time to have extra modesty and to not be seen in sleeping clothes.

On the whole, in times when I have been in mixed sex company on camping, lakehouse, or other events which were overnight endeavors everyone behaved appropriately. But, of course, this is entirely dependent upon the group of people.

 

[Bookcat]

There is a big difference between a group of young people (guys and girls) getting together for some fun.

During the day.
*
And them staying up very late together.*

and then sleeping in the same place.

 

[Darran]

I am willing to make the sacrifice and not go in order to decrease the chances of a sin being committed; but I feel like maybe I am being overscrupulous, and maybe I should just go, and trust that the guys are mature and respectable enough not to succumb to such thoughts.

To be rockhard honest, you will be very hard pushed to find a fella in his early twenties who is mature and respectable enough to control himself. Very hard pushed. The fact of them being non-Catholics lowers the chances of that significantly into-the-bargain. I’m saying this as a 19 y/o male.

It seems that only you can judge whether or not this is a good idea, I’ve never heard of adults having a sleep-over myself apart from very dodgy sources. You feel suspiscious about the matter, you may be right to feel that way, but we cannot say.

However, nobody should EVER worry about being scrupulous unless it effects their life with God (such as missing confession) or unless they are diagnosed with OCD. If what people tend to call “scrupulosity” these days were a real vice, we quite literally would have no saints. So don’t worry about that, use your best judgement. Pray for the answer if you don’t know what to do.

 

[Darran]

Well, men having lustful thoughts (or women) can happen on a crowded city bus or subway. Does that mean riding the bus is immoral?

Simply *being *in a group of people is not sinful, and you are worried about other people’s **potential **sins-- so I would say that is scrupulous.

Being on a bus is vastly different to sleeping together at night. Being wary of other peoples potential sins because of your person, and acting to reduce those chances can be an act of loving charity, not neccesarily scrupulosity.

The good fight for personal purity would be much easier in this day and age if more people acted this way.

 

[TheWatcher]

I’m again agreeing with 1ke, carn, and DexUK.

You are a potential occasion for sin where-ever you go. The suggestion of the ivory tower where you are never seen probably wouldn’t be enough.

I don’t feel that you need to take responsibility for anyone’s thoughts. Obviously, I’m in the minority here, but I am going out on a limb and guessing that most wouldn’t expect you to shoulder the full responsibility of another’s thoughts either. The guys are responsible for their own thoughts, too.

Again, I would leave yourself an out. If you are there, and the men are obviously thinking about it and you’re uncomfortable, leave.

There really isn’t anything inherently immoral about a party or sleeping.

 

[Corki]

I would be wary of a party that is billed as a “sleep over”. Or a sleep over that is primarily couples.

On the other hand, there are “sleep over” situations that aren’t necessarily problematic.

For example, when I was in college I had many friends who went to “rival” schools. During football season, it was not unusual for a friend to bring a mixed group to our house for the game weekend. We did the same thing when we traveled to their college towns. I don’t see a problem with that.

Another example was a vacation. The parents of one of my friends had a summer house on a lake. They graciously offered it to the kids once in a while. We had a girls’ bedroom, a boys’ bedroom and a mixed group in the living room.

In both cases, sleeping together was not the goal but rather a budget-concious way to achieive another goal.

Ultimately, you know your friends. You have to determine if they are going to behave in ways that make you uncomfortable.

 

[TheWatcher]

Being on a bus is vastly different to sleeping together at night. Being wary of other peoples potential sins because of your person, and acting to reduce those chances can be an act of loving charity, not neccesarily scrupulosity.

The good fight for personal purity would be much easier in this day and age if more people acted this way.

I agree that it is vastly different- but not in the way you’re implying.

Riding a bus and getting ogled, because I happened to wear my hair down that day, I am being completely objectified into a object for lust. I am not a person; I am a thing.

Sleeping over at a friend’s house, where the friend knows me and thinks of me as an actual person- reduced chance of being an occasion of lust. If the other person is respectful, they’re not going to have problems. If they do have problems, they have the responsibility for dealing with them. They can remove themselves from the party too.

 

[Bookcat]

I agree that it is vastly different- but not in the way you’re implying.

Riding a bus and getting ogled, because I happened to wear my hair down that day, I am being completely objectified into a object for lust. I am not a person; I am a thing.

Sleeping over at a friend’s house, where the friend knows me and thinks of me as an actual person- reduced chance of being an occasion of lust. If the other person is respectful, they’re not going to have problems. If they do have problems, they have the responsibility for dealing with them. They can remove themselves from the party too.

While your personalism there is wonderful. I note your self -description is “atheist”. I would suggest that there is more to Christian chastity and modestly than what you may see or accept in your atheism.

There is a vast difference between you wearing your hair down in a non-immodest way and someone treating you as an object.

And a group of young persons of various backgrounds likely influenced by the surrounding culture of disordered sexual lives (or even those seeking to live chaste and modest lives) – staying up through the night and sleeping in the same place.

 

[Darran]

I agree that it is vastly different- but not in the way you’re implying.

Riding a bus and getting ogled, because I happened to wear my hair down that day, I am being completely objectified into a object for lust. I am not a person; I am a thing.

Sleeping over at a friend’s house, where the friend knows me and thinks of me as an actual person- reduced chance of being an occasion of lust. If the other person is respectful, they’re not going to have problems. If they do have problems, they have the responsibility for dealing with them. They can remove themselves from the party too.

You are explaining a particular circumstance. That’s not what she has told us. From all that we can gather, she is atleast doubtful about the people present. She doesn’t want to cause them to sin by impurity, even in thought. It wouldn’t be reasonable to assume that she simply feels responsible for them given what we do know, she could simply be wanting to do them a favour.

I have a brilliant pair of bright yellow speedo’s in my bottom drawer my brother bought for a joke, would it be fair for me to force others to restrain themselves should I fancy a “breezy” walk to get some tea bags? Bus, sleepover or not! I’m not responsible for them, simply doing them a favour.

 

[1ke]

Being on a bus is vastly different to sleeping together at night. Being wary of other peoples potential sins because of your person, and acting to reduce those chances can be an act of loving charity, not neccesarily scrupulosity.

The good fight for personal purity would be much easier in this day and age if more people acted this way.

I do not believe the OP stated there would be sleeping together. The OP said there would be sleeping over. That can be done in separate rooms.

I am still not convinced of a need for staying overnight, the OP has not stated why there is such a need. Clearly by her comments she can go home, so it seems local and not some sort of camping or destination event.

It is still a matter for prudential judgment.