Virginity and marriage.

[Sarcelle]

No not they are going now at this moment, but her plans and designs. If you are wealthy enough to put all kids through private school and ensure they (more than 2) will have ample college funds by the time they are ready, you are typically in atleast what??? The top 25 ish % ??

Also how is even one tiny fact about college pulled fron the overall point relevant even if it were true?

Oh that is right, that is all some can do, extract a single tiny detail and pretend the rest of wha5 was said doesnt exist

Oh come on!!! Where did I say you were wrong on any of your posts?

In fact, I challenge you to find any post of mine on this thread where I even disagreed with you.

I was just bringing to your attention that Xantippe’s kids are below college age, not to discredit any of your main posts. As for your other points, I actually agree.

That’s it. My post was not meant to bring up anything against you.

 

[Sarcelle]

Why is it alwags that??

I say “trraditional” and “ideal” looks more or less on paper like Xantippe.

You angry ladies say that anything that resembles that is in fact 18yrold dropouts and a man with mental disorders…

Okay.

I see where you are coming from. I am one of those angry ladies you speak of.

I can’t see why when I haven’t even been part of the argument taking place.

 

[Xantippe]

She advocates the marriage that leads to divorce while she lives a Norman Rockwell life…

???

I’m advocating for the best, most solid, most functional style of marriage and family life that I know how.

 

[LightBound]

She advocates the marriage that leads to divorce while she lives a Norman Rockwell life…

(In terms of pristine imagery, idk anything about how the man lived lol)

What the hell are you babbling about now? Ok, you’re pissed your wife left, we get it. You’re angry and upset, but geez…calm down and grow up before you join the big people conversations.

 

[BlueEyedLady]

Why is it alwags that??

I say “trraditional” and “ideal” looks more or less on paper like Xantippe.

You angry ladies say that anything that resembles that is in fact 18yrold dropouts and a man with mental disorders…

You said she advocates for the kind of marriages that end in divorce, and that’s not the case - not by what she says or how they live. She advocates things that have been shown to actually reduce the risk of divorce.

 

[LethalMouse]

Okay.

I see where you are coming from. I am one of those angry ladies you speak of.

I can’t see why when I haven’t even been part of the argument taking place.

Well, as my one boss would say in meetings, if it applies to you take it, if not ignore it

But in fairness, I do lump you, Xantippe, BlueEyedLady, and Rau in a pot typically based on threads of a similar nature.

In fairness perhaps I was a bit predjudice in noting your posts and I apologize if I was so :imsorry:

 

[SilverShadow22]

But several of those things are immediately apparent in a way that virginity is not. I don’t know, I’m not the OP but I don’t even know how you could politely bring it up in conversation until the relationship is progressed to a certain point, at which point it’s unlikely to matter unless something really earth shattering is revealed.

Hm. Well, as a virgin dating a non, it never came up because it was known from the start. I knew him somewhat before we started dating, and we started dating with the pre-existing knowledge that

A. I’d never been on a date or in a relationship or indeed, even held hands
B. He has a child

So… No one even needed to ask LOL

 

[pensmama87]

Hm. Well, as a virgin dating a non, it never came up because it was known from the start. I knew him somewhat before we started dating, and we started dating with the pre-existing knowledge that

A. I’d never been on a date or in a relationship or indeed, even held hands
B. He has a child

So… No one even needed to ask LOL

Ha! Well, yes, sometimes it is obvious.

My point is that absent obvious markers (first ever dating experience, which tends to come up pretty organically during get-to-know-you chitchat; having a child or being a widow/er), one’s sexual history is typically not immediately apparent and it’s generally considered really, really rude to ask.

As a couple gets more serious and starts discussing marriage it may come up, but by then it’s probably apparent by attitudes etc whether one is committed to chastity or not, so the past specifics may matter less. I think it’s fair to disclose at that point, but if it ended up being a dealbreaker I’d think it’d say more about the person who broke it off, unless it was reeeeeally out there stuff. For most people, it’s not. People are a lot more “vanilla” than contemporary media would have us think - at least in terms of our actual behavior.

 

[SilverShadow22]

Ha! Well, yes, sometimes it is obvious.

My point is that absent obvious markers (first ever dating experience, which tends to come up pretty organically during get-to-know-you chitchat; having a child or being a widow/er), one’s sexual history is typically not immediately apparent and it’s generally considered really, really rude to ask.

As a couple gets more serious and starts discussing marriage it may come up, but by then it’s probably apparent by attitudes etc whether one is committed to chastity or not, so the past specifics may matter less. I think it’s fair to disclose at that point, but if it ended up being a dealbreaker I’d think it’d say more about the person who broke it off, unless it was reeeeeally out there stuff. For most people, it’s not. People are a lot more “vanilla” than contemporary media would have us think - at least in terms of our actual behavior.

Then again, I didn’t have to ask for more specific details because he volunteered them, so I’d know exactly what I was getting into, especially given my overall inexperience. I do not hold his past against him, because the circumstances of it don’t make it an ongoing problem.

There are scars that disrupt function and then there are scars that are only marks. The first kind can impede marriage, and the second only requires forgiveness and mercy.

I believe I’m dealing with the second kind.

 

[Monica4316]

As the victim of sexual assault as a teenager, I find some of these responses highly insulting.

OP, you are free, of course, to reject anyone for any reason. But Jesus has forgiven the repentant and it’s my opinion that holding someone’s past against them when they have repented is to put yourself above God. If He has forgiven her, why can’t you? Have you never made a mistake?

“Though your sins are like scarlet,
they shall be as white as snow;
though they are red like crimson,
they shall become like wool.”

I urge you to look for chastity over physical virginity. But if you are unable to do so for whatever reason, then I suppose the woman in question will have dodged a bullet.

To be fair, I think a lot of people don’t necessarily think of sexual assault victims when they think of virginity. I know a lot of Christian guys who would consider a woman who had been assaulted to still be a virgin.

Not to derail the thread, but I did read in some Catholic writing that being assaulted, even if it results in the loss of physical integrity “medically”, does not actually result in the loss of virginity. In order to lose virginity, the person has to willfully consent to pleasure they experience.

People who get assaulted, against their will, are still considered theologically to be virgins.

 

[Xantippe]

Ha! Well, yes, sometimes it is obvious.

My point is that absent obvious markers (first ever dating experience, which tends to come up pretty organically during get-to-know-you chitchat; having a child or being a widow/er), one’s sexual history is typically not immediately apparent and it’s generally considered really, really rude to ask.

As a couple gets more serious and starts discussing marriage it may come up, but by then it’s probably apparent by attitudes etc whether one is committed to chastity or not, so the past specifics may matter less. I think it’s fair to disclose at that point, but if it ended up being a dealbreaker I’d think it’d say more about the person who broke it off, unless it was reeeeeally out there stuff. For most people, it’s not. People are a lot more “vanilla” than contemporary media would have us think - at least in terms of our actual behavior.

Right.

 

[Sarcelle]

Well, as my one boss would say in meetings, if it applies to you take it, if not ignore it

But in fairness, I do lump you, Xantippe, BlueEyedLady, and Rau in a pot typically based on threads of a similar nature.

In fairness perhaps I was a bit predjudice in noting your posts and I apologize if I was so :imsorry:

You are forgiven.

On my part, sorry for snapping at you.

 

[LethalMouse]

???

I’m advocating for the best, most solid, most functional style of marriage and family life that I know how.

It is overall, what you have you say works. But you tell people do do the opposite

And it is often done via a play on words

 

[LethalMouse]

Not to derail the thread, but I did read in some Catholic writing that being assaulted, even if it results in the loss of physical integrity “medically”, does not actually result in the loss of virginity. In order to lose virginity, the person has to willfully consent to pleasure they experience.

People who get assaulted, against their will, are still considered theologically to be virgins.

I believe so without research, but virginity “theologically” is about virtue, not medicine. A victim of true rape would naturally be no less virtuous as a result in thendirect sense.

 

[DarkLight]

I believe so without research, but virginity “theologically” is about virtue, not medicine. A victim of true rape would naturally be no less virtuous as a result in thendirect sense.

It’s about a little more than that, since two women can be equally chaste with only one being a virgin

 

[LethalMouse]

It’s about a little more than that, since two women can be equally chaste with only one being a virgin

If you mean post virginity (consensual sex wise) vs always a virgin then idk maybe that is debatable?

In that the always virgin/rape victim maintained at least that portion of saintlyness always, vs the obvious repented sinner.

Now that doesn’t make the sinner not a saint, but hierarchy in heaven and all that… I would pressume there is a better chance theoretically of the always saint gaining more.

Although there is that one about who has much forgiven…

 

[DarkLight]

If you mean post virginity (consensual sex wise) vs always a virgin then idk maybe that is debatable?

In that the always virgin/rape victim maintained at least that portion of saintlyness always, vs the obvious repented sinner.

Now that doesn’t make the sinner not a saint, but hierarchy in heaven and all that… I would pressume there is a better chance theoretically of the always saint gaining more.

Although there is that one about who has much forgiven…

Chastity just refers to keeping sexual activity within its God-given bounds. So a woman who is a widow but never had sex with anyone other than her late husband is equally chaste to the woman who was raped but never chose consensual sex at all. But only the latter is a virgin, theologically speaking.

 

[LethalMouse]

Chastity just refers to keeping sexual activity within its God-given bounds. So a woman who is a widow but never had sex with anyone other than her late husband is equally chaste to the woman who was raped but never chose consensual sex at all. But only the latter is a virgin, theologically speaking.

Truth, I did not think of the widow. I always equate the widow with a virgin in virtue

Except maybe the black widow

 

[SilverShadow22]

This right here is one of the reasons why I took the Red Pill. You have all those girls saying they want a nice romantic beta guy who will treat them as equal, get affirmative consent, and then be a good Feminist/castrati. Then they turn around and buy a book about a 6’ billionaire who ties up women, dominates them, and does all manner of weird and freaky things to them.

As a 25 year old female, in her first relationship and completely untouched in any way at all prior …

I avoided ‘romance’ novels like the plague, deliberately. I felt I didn’t need ideas in my head that might later clash with reality. The only ‘romance’ I read was the old fashioned fall in love kind that gets put in most YA books. In fact, I refused to read the vast majority of recent ‘adult’ books because many have at least one sex scene in there.

I liked certain romantic aspects of movies, sure. I was building my Ideal out of multiple abstract portions. I like this bit of that character, that bit of another… I have never had a ‘celebrity crush’. I very specifically say I like certain CHARACTERS because they are completely different from the actors and I know it.

So I in fact quite consciously saved myself, I avoided falling in love with an ideal no man could match, I did not obsess over certain eye colors or body types, and some part of me did this not only because it is right and moral, but because it increased my chances of success.

And, surprise! I’m seriously dating a man about whom my sister said ‘I wouldn’t have thought he was your type’ to which I said ‘what? I do not have a type!’

In fact I said I would probably fall for the first decent man who wanted me. Which is exactly what happened, though it soon went well beyond that.

And no I never fantasized about any of that. So hello from a girl who isn’t a hypocrite. Maybe I can help you believe that women aren’t all like you think, while you’re certainly not helping restore any faith in men by heading to the dark side from the other direction as feminism.

 

[Monica4316]

I believe so without research, but virginity “theologically” is about virtue, not medicine. A victim of true rape would naturally be no less virtuous as a result in thendirect sense.

It’s about a little more than that, since two women can be equally chaste with only one being a virgin

what I specifically read is that a woman who is raped IS actually still a virgin.