Sex before marriage?

[Jachut 487]

Yeah, I guess I spoke strongly. I dont think that those who dont want sex before marriage think its dirty, it was more that I tend to think that teaching a 10 year old not to look at women would lead him to that conclusion. But I understand that that's just my take on it and not necessarily how it was.

[gadgetlady 4]

Yeah, I guess I spoke strongly. I dont think that those who dont want sex before marriage think its dirty, it was more that I tend to think that teaching a 10 year old not to look at women would lead him to that conclusion. But I understand that that's just my take on it and not necessarily how it was.

LOL! It's not teaching him not to look at women, it's teaching him not to look at women's BOOBS! How many times have you wanted to say to a grown man, "Hey buddy, my eyes are up here!" Teach 'em young and you'll never have to do that

(That being said, I'm sure there are some of you out there who like it when men talk to your boobs instead of your face -- and that's fine, again, for you. I just prefer that women aren't objectified and that I'm valued for what's in my head rather than what's in my bra.)

[Wheetsin 714]

He respects me AND other women too much to look.

This I can relate to. And that's why when people poll or discuss whether or not you'd cheat, or your spouse would cheat, I can say with completely confidence that my husband would never cheat on me. Hubby works in very much of a "boys' club" department - all men, all friends outside of work... heck half of them live within 10 minutes of us. On business trips with vendors, they almost always go to a strip club, and DH is always either in his hotel room chatting with me while he does work and I do homework, or (several times) he's opted to wait out in the parking lot and call me instead. His first year in the department, for his birthday, he learned that it's tradition to go to a local club and the other guys buy you a lapdance. So he was sure to be out sick that day.

Probably makes him sound like a prude or somehow "not normal", but that's not the case at all. He was just raised somewhat old-fashioned, and with a deep respect for women, and - in his words - just can't find anything attractive about a woman who lets men ogle her to pay her bills. From his perspective, he's sad the person has so little self-respect.

[Northernsun 4]

I met my DH at a bar one night where we talked for 3 hrs straight and he came home with me that night and never left. Soon his clothes started appearing then the stereo ( I didn't have one so it was really appreciated!) and before you knew it he was always there. We lived together for over a yr and finally decided to get married. We have been married for 32 yrs and he still is my only and my best friend and I can safely say he feels the same about me. Aw the memories we have of that time!

What worked for me worked for me. I am a "whatever floats your boat" kind of person. We are all so diverse in our beliefs and feelings, how can anyone be right or wrong? I explained all the birds and bees stuff from a young age with my daughter and saw her on the pill when she was ready to think about sex. And there my knowledge ended and that is fine with me. I still get the OH mom! when my dh and I laugh at a chance remark or give the look. It is her life and her decision to make- just as it is each and everyone of ours.

[marys 2]

I'm in my 40's and not/never married although with my guy for about 14 years. I had sex in college (for the first time) and it was horrible - i just wanted to do it to see what the fuss was all about - it wasn't good and i wondered for years what the heck I was missing out on. I'm thankful I've never had to deal with an std or pregnancy and I'm in a monogomous and very nice sexual and loving relationship. I've known many virgins till marriage as I've always had a wide range of friends and i remember one friend who was berated by her doc for her virignity and insisted on wanting to know what was wrong with her. jeez! Great thread and i've enjoyed everyone's comments - we are quite the diverse group.

[anonemouse 1]

I have a good friend who has a 10YO son. From a very early age, she taught him to "avert his eyes" whenever he saw a scantily-clad woman (at the beach, the pool, or just someone walking down the street who wasn't well covered). She told him that while he might not understand why, it was a good habit for him to develop NOW so that when he did understand, it would come naturally to him. I look at her early training and think, "That boy's going to make someone an awesome husband one day" (assuming he follows her teaching). Some of you may think the gawking and lusting and potential delving into pornography are just fine -- but for those of us who don't, what she's doing is an awesome thing. It's all a matter of perspective and values and what matters to each of us individually.

I have to say that I also find this somewhat disturbing. I know what the intent is, and I find that admirable. That said, I don't know whether this would be the best way to go about it. To me, it does teach that women's bodies are not to be admired in any way, and yes, I think it teaches young boys that women's bodies are dirty and that admiring them is shameful. At a certain age, I think that teaching a boy that he can admire a woman's body and not ogle her is a wonderful thing. But to look away in what I can only imagine is disgust? Gadgetlady, you said that the boy is 10 now, and that his mother had taught him from an earlier age. To me, that is too early. To me, that child probably had no idea why he was being told to look away from women, just that there was something wrong that he wasn't supposed to see. I personally think it may serve to sexualize him earlier than he might have been normally. Again, I think the intent was noble, but not so much the method.

[YeeHaw 0]

I experssed my opinion earlier in this thread. I got the same responce that gadgetlady got. I deleted all my post because I felt like people were being rude and not respecting my feelings or values. Yes, gadgetlady you are right about me. My husband and I never had ANYTHING before each other. No other girlfriends/boyfriends, not holding hands, no kissing, no nothing with other people. Neither one of us had any idea what the opposite sex looked like naked, this was on purpose. We were very careful to avoid the conversation that our friends were talking about, we just walked away. People may ask, Why? It is because we wanted to be completly surprised on our wedding night. I saved myself for him and he did the same for me. When I say that we saved ourselves for eash other, I did not know that I was saving myself for him and vise versa, we just knew that we were waiting for the person that God intended. When we met, we knew that each other is who we had been waiting for.

Someone said that the reason that most virgins are virgins is becasue they never had to say no or something like that. This is sooooooo wrong.

SELF CONTROL, not just to sex, but to kissing, and whatever else.

Need I say more.

I have never seen him look at another woman, unless, I say something like WOW, honey, Look at her boobs. Then he will look and we will talk about how gross it is. You know what I mean? I know that there are many people that are going to say "He looks, you just arent around" or " It's just human nature" Your husbands and boyfriends may do that but mine doesn't.

Sex is not dirty it is a wonderful and spiritual thing and I personally wanted to only share it with my husband. These are my beliefs and values.

* The story about the mother that teaches her boy to not look.

IMO This is how it should be. What is so wrong with this? (That is a retorical question.)

Because of our beliefs and values as Christians, when my husband sees any skin, he will just look down or at me. I often have to ask him, what are you doing? He will just give me the look and I know the reason.

Sometimes I want him to look at someone that I see. Maybe because I can't believa she wore that or her butt hanging out or whatever it might be. I'll say look at her...... He just says, I don't want to see anything but you. This is not a daily occurance, I am just giving some examples so maybe people will understand what I am talking about.

I guess to sum this all up. We always gaurd our eyes, our heart, and our minds. We love each other and are happily married.

We have no concerns that the other is cheating or even looking else where.

Many people live a life of "Whatever feels good, do it"

This is not how I believe. But for those of you who do, I am not judging you. That is your life. I don't care. I am not telling you that you are wrong. I am just explaining my views mostly because I feel that gadgetlady would like some company on this issue.

[YeeHaw 0]

One thing I left out.

We never took sex education in school. This was a choice.

We have never seen a diagram of any private part.

We have just seen each other.

[anonemouse 1]

* The story about the mother that teaches her boy to not look.

IMO This is how it should be. What is so wrong with this? (That is a retorical question.)

Like I said earleir, I don't think the intent is bad at all. The method is just one that I don't really approve of. When you tell a very young child to look away from women when he probably doesn't even know why he is looking away from them, I think it can set the stage for trouble later in life. There aren't that many options with a child that young. If you tell him why he is supposed to look away, you are the one exposing him to sex at an early age, not the other woman. If you don't tell him why you are making him look away, I think he would eventually come to the conclusion that there is something bad or dirty about women that he isn't supposed to see. That's my objection to the method, anyway. Like I said, the intent is a wonderful thing. I think more men should learn not to ogle. But I don't think this is the way to do it, in most cases.

[missy4gordon 0]

Like I said earleir, I don't think the intent is bad at all. The method is just one that I don't really approve of. When you tell a very young child to look away from women when he probably doesn't even know why he is looking away from them, I think it can set the stage for trouble later in life. There aren't that many options with a child that young. If you tell him why he is supposed to look away, you are the one exposing him to sex at an early age, not the other woman. If you don't tell him why you are making him look away, I think he would eventually come to the conclusion that there is something bad or dirty about women that he isn't supposed to see. That's my objection to the method, anyway. Like I said, the intent is a wonderful thing. I think more men should learn not to ogle. But I don't think this is the way to do it, in most cases.

Ok, since you don't *approve* of this method but do admire the intent, what method would you use to teach this type of thing to young boys? Why would you think 10 is too young? I have an almost 9 year old and will be facing issues sooner rather than later, I'm not going to wait until he is sixteen and it is *oops* too late, at that age, they might not be as willing to listen to you. I think what this lady is doing is a wonderful thing and since you object I really would love to hear an alternative.....

One a side note, I don't see too many scantily clad woman to have to divert his eyes from lately, it's freakin -20 below zero here!!! YIKES!!

[lisah25 3]

The problem is that those of us who believe sex is best reserved for marriage are often met with the sentiment that we think sex is "dirty" and the human body is "shameful". You're not the first person I've heard it from. What I'd like to get across to those of you who think sex is fine, whenever, with whoever, for whatever reason -- that's fine for YOU! But it's not for me and people who think like me, and just because it's NOT fine for us doesn't mean that we don't like sex and we're suppressed by the church or images of mean old ladies looking down their noses at us. It's just plain not true.

That is a VERY good point Gadgetlady. Just because someone chooses to reserve sexual activity for some situations, like being married, doesn't mean that they are against sex. Or don't really enjoy it within the bounds of what they believe is right.

[lisah25 3]

One general comment I've been meaning to make is that not everyone who wasn't a virgin on their wedding night treats sex as casual and had lots of partners.

[TommyO 5]

When you decide to have sex or with who they decide to have sex with is up to the individual, I do not think that people who decide to wait for mairrage before having sex are doing anything wrong. To me it's no different than deciding that you want to wait until the next year to go on a trip, it's your decision.

I do take issue when there is an assumption of guilt by abstainers for all those who choose not to wait. The idea that those who wait are doing something good is incorrect. The list of things that Gadget Lady presented is not logicall to me. I have never worried about any of those items and I never will. I can't imagine what would make someone worry about those items except possibly being taught that sex was bad as a child.

I am only guessing but that 10 year old boy who was taught to look away from ladies might worry about that when he's grown up. I am prone to think that only someone who was raised by someone of such puritanical beleifs would have those sorts of thoughts going through their minds.

I plan to go to Europe next year I have no problem with anyone who goes this year but I bet they are msitaken

[anonemouse 1]

Ok, since you don't *approve* of this method but do admire the intent, what method would you use to teach this type of thing to young boys? Why would you think 10 is too young? I have an almost 9 year old and will be facing issues sooner rather than later, I'm not going to wait until he is sixteen and it is *oops* too late, at that age, they might not be as willing to listen to you. I think what this lady is doing is a wonderful thing and since you object I really would love to hear an alternative.....

From what Gadgetlady said, I inferred that the woman had been teaching her son to look away from women for quite a while. I really have no problem with the method when it is used at an appropriate age, but I feel that if your child is too young to learn about sex, that method is not age-appropriate, because of the reasons I stated earlier. I agree, waiting until your son is 16 is too long to teach him to respect women, but I also think that using the method when your son is 4, or 5, or 6, etc. is going way too far, too early. Simply put, if your child is too young to understand the reasons why he is doing what he is (whatever the method may be), he is probably too young to use that particular method. If your son is about to hit puberty, and is starting to notice women, then I think the method is age-appropriate. But until then, I think using the method would simply be either sexualizing a child earlier than he would be otherwise (since, at that point, he hopefully wouldn't have realized that there was supposed to be something titillating about a woman's body being exposed) or making him think that there was something wrong about those women he's not supposed to look at.

[anonemouse 1]

Some of you may be wondering about what I mean by "early sexualization". It's something that we've all seen, whether in real life or in movies and on TV. You know, the family is all standing around, usually in a group of people. One person doesn something a little shocking or risque, and the parents reach down to cover the child's eyes. Now, the child might not really realize that what he or she is watching is considered "taboo", but by the simple act of covering his or her eyes, the parents make it clear that it is something the child isn't supposed to see. Of course, this makes the child want to see it even more, so they move the parent's hands away.

To me, the method that Gadgetlady descibed is similar to that situation, when it is used on a child that is too young. By telling a very young child not to look at scantily-clad women, I think that the message sent is that there is something there that is forbidden. Many kids, I think, would actually want to find out what it is that their parents are trying to keep them from seeing. By using the method on a too-young child, IMO, you would risk exposing him to something that he wouldn't have discovered for several more years.