posted
No, I'm saying that if studies showed that having premarital sex was beneficial for your marriage, would you change your mind regarding it?
Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Lalo: Don't get snarky. This thread was going so well.
I consider sex before marriage irresponsible-- see my mountain climbing quote above. The danger is inherent in the act.
Unwanted pregnancy.
Emotional/Psychological damage.
Venereal disease. Here are some studies for other people to dispute, and which help answer Lalo's question:
quote: If a couple abstains from sex before marriage, they are 29 to 47% more likely to enjoy sex afterward than those who cohabit . Sexual satisfaction rises considerably more after marriage (Hering 1994:4). More women cohabit than men, but men are more likely to cohabit serially (Bumpass & Sweet 1989; Teachman & Polanko 1990).
The majority of cohabitors either breakup or marry within two years (Bumpass 1994).
The risk of divorce after living together is 40 to 85% higher than the risk of divorce after not living together. In other words, those who live together before marriage are almost twice as likely to divorce than those who did not live together (Bumpass & Sweet 1995; Hall & Zhao 1995; Bracher, Santow, Morgan & Russell 1993; DeMaris & Rao 1992 and Glen 1990).
50% to 60% of first time cohabitors marry the person with whom they cohabit. 76% report plans to marry their partner, but a lower percentage actually do so (Brown & Booth 1996 and Bumpass & Sweet 1989).
10% to 30% of cohabitors intend to never marry (Bumpass & Sweet 1990).
Those who cohabit more than once prior to marriage have much higher rates of later divorce - 26% for women and 19% for men (Brown & Booth 1996; McManus 1993; Stets 1993; Thompson & Colella 1992).
[ February 01, 2004, 06:17 PM: Message edited by: Scott R ]
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
1. No, I do not agree with Stormy. I consider pre-marital inherently irresponsible, and all-around bad idea, and destructive in terms of building a happy marriage after.
2. No, I'm not married.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Storm, I’m not trying to bring absolutism into the discussion. I’m trying to bring reality into it. The fact is, there are a lot worse sexual difficulties for married couples to deal with than that one partner wants sex more often than the other. And yet they deal with them. So the idea that different libidos is a “probably not solvable” problem is, to me, laughable.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote: If a couple abstains from sex before marriage, they are 29 to 47% more likely to enjoy sex afterward than those who cohabit . Sexual satisfaction rises considerably more after marriage
I just find this statement kind of amusing. Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Folks, Rakeesh already answered the question.
quote:This is a pretty cut-and-dried argument. People who are inclined to believe there isn't anything wrong with premarital sex are almost certainly not going to have any problem with premarital sexual experimentation to determine sexual compatibility.
People who are inclined to believe there is something wrong with premarital sex are almost certainly not going to believe that humans are "sexual creatures", and that among the most crucial things to a successful and happy marriage, sex isn't the first one or even the second or perhaps the third.
So instead of arguing about the quote, just say whether or not you approve of premarital sex or have a problem with it. It'll save time.
This is one of those arguments where no one's position will be changed by skilled debating.
I have no problem with responsible premarital sex. I also have no problem with someone who doesn't believe in it. I honor their decision and that's the end of it.
People who truly love each other can have sex before marriage without undue harm and possibly with greater results. People who truly love each other can wait until after the ceremony without undue harm and possibly with greater results. Depends on the people involved. Your mileage may vary.
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
Wait, does everyone measure in miles? I use inches. And I'm suddenly overcome with a need to compensate with a big truck.
Posts: 3293 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
The problem with all these studies and premarital sex/cohabitation is that you run into a lot of problems with correlation and causation. Why do you get the results that you get? Is it the premarital sex that's causing the results or...God, or religion, or marital expectations? You see what I'm saying?
I respect what the studies say. I've seen them before.
There is also a rather large problem with those kinds of studies in that it doesn't answer the question of what to do with those annoying statistical minorities for whom, say , premarital sex is good for them. It's not 100%, see? That's why I asked JB my question. Even if the some study shows that some action is correct, some things are beyond discussion. Sexual morality is often one of those things. Just as you could never get JB to, if he were single, have premarital sex if it could be proven that it was most healthy, likewise, there are people for whom premarital sex is a necessity for their well being for various reasons that have nothing to do with what is objectively right or wrong. It's just who they are.
My contention isn't that having premarital sex is the 'best' way to go. My argument is that it is the 'responsible' thing to do for some people.
So, I guess I essentially agree with Mr. Rakeesh and Chris.
Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Where I disagree with Rakeesh and Chris is that this breaks down into whether or not you approve of pre-marital sex in general. I think using sex as a screening for marriage is a separate issue. (It might come from doing marital and pre-marital counseling, but maybe not. Could just be me.) IMO, if you are not sure that you want to spend the rest of your life with someone even if you encounter sexual problems then you shouldn’t be getting married either way.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:People who are inclined to believe there is something wrong with premarital sex are almost certainly not going to believe that humans are "sexual creatures", and that among the most crucial things to a successful and happy marriage, sex isn't the first one or even the second or perhaps the third.
Oh, I'm certainly not saying that we aren't sexual beings, or that sexual fulfillment isn't crucial to a successful and happy marriage. I just don't believe that you have to have sex before marriage to decide if you're compatible. If there are such huge differences in libido or tastes, they'll probably manifest themselves in other ways.
quote:The problem with all these studies and premarital sex/cohabitation is that you run into a lot of problems with correlation and causation. Why do you get the results that you get? Is it the premarital sex that's causing the results or...God, or religion, or marital expectations? You see what I'm saying?
But the fact is that there is some sort of correlation. That's gotta be worth something.
Posts: 9945 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Where I disagree with Rakeesh and Chris is that this breaks down into whether or not you approve of pre-marital sex in general.
Then I didn't express myself well enough.
You can't approve of pre-marital sex in general, not if you're paying attention. There are people in the world who, for any number of reasons, should not have sex before marriage.
I can't even say I "approve" of pre-marital sex for any specific couple. It's not my call, I'm not either one of them. My wife and I were intimate for five years before we were married, and our son was six months old. I don't believe that it made any difference to our marriage, largely because our marriage ceremony was a declaration of an existing condition more than a new beginning. However, I have known friends who had sex before marriage and it was a mistake. In one instance it even soured the relationship. This doesn't mean we could handle it better, or were more well-adjusted or anything. It means that everyone is different and every relationship is a different dynamic.
Any declaration of "this is the only way to make a relationship work" is wrong.
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Chris, are you asserting that the paragraphs you quoted from Rakeesh are not saying that the issues boils down to general approval or disapproval of pre-marital sex? Because that’s sure how I read what he said.
posted
The logic here is astounding. I wonder: do the same people who are asserting that premarital sex makes for a better marriage, since it supposedly lets the partners get a better "understanding" of each other, think that living together also makes for a more successful marriage? Because the reasoning you are using to make the excuse for it is signifying that you would also feel the same about that. And if you do, can you provide statistical proof that this is so?
Posts: 346 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Chris, are you asserting that the paragraphs you quoted from Rakeesh are not saying that the issues boils down to general approval or disapproval of pre-marital sex? Because that’s sure how I read what he said.
The quote suggests that your attitude towards pre-marital sex will determine your approval or disapproval, which to me seems pretty obvious.
My additional comments were added to emphasize that I don't think anyone can approve or disapprove of pre-marital sex for anyone besides themselves on a case-by-case basis. It's a fine sentiment to wait until marriage, but there will always be those couples who really should have become intimate beforehand, just as there will always be those people who should wait, even if they think it's a good idea. It. Depends. On. The. People. Involved.
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
When the statistics agree with us, we say, "see, the statistics are right!" When they disagree with us, we say, "see? Anyone can say anything with statistics. They don't mean anything." It doesn't change the reality that people who are planning to enter a marriage who decide it's okay to share the intimacy of marriage before the committment is made are far more likely to have an unsuccessful marriage than not. It's not just dancing numbers around or twisting some kind of truth, nor is it trying to make some kind of moral argument. It simply is, and even psychologists aren't completely sure enough to give a definitive reason why without delving into ethics and morals, which people have enough trouble agreeing on. This is a pattern, an observed one, which is why arguing in favor of premarital sex to somehow "strengthen" the chances in marriage is downright ridiculous, totally ignoring the logic it is attempting to espouse. Not just statistically, but realistically, marriages that begin with intimacy first and committment later tend to fail more than committment first and intimacy after. It just is.
Posts: 346 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Afraid I can't offer statistics. Or charts, or studies, or graphs.
Thing is, my wife and I were intimate for quite some time before we married. We've been together 23 years and married 18 and are disgustingly happy with each other. There is no way I can be convinced that pre-marital sex is wrong in all cases, because my own personal experience says otherwise.
Advocate waiting for marriage all you like, and I'll support you. But I maintain that there will still be those - possibly a tiny minority, possibly not - who would benefit more from pre-marital sex than they would by waiting. Every social rule has an exception.
That said, I don't advocate sexual relations before a level of commitment exists that's pretty darn close to marriage anyway. Having sex to strengthen a relationship is stupid. You have sex after the relationship is strong enough to support and embrace it, not before. I just don't agree that a marriage license is the only demarcation point.
[ February 01, 2004, 11:02 PM: Message edited by: Chris Bridges ]
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
As someone who engages in pre-marital sex, I'd like to say that I don't believe that sexual compatibility should ever be a determining factor in whether or not the relationship will work. I also don't think you need to have sex before marriage in order to make sure it's good. Or however you want to put it. My opinion is that sex can be, how to say this, "worked on" and improved over time. If it's bad at first, that doesn't mean it can't be fixed. If you truly care about and enjoy the company of the other person, or even love them, why the heck can't it be worked on? I'm reminded of the Ally McBeal episode where she broke up with Billy the Brit because he was bad in bed. Sad, sad, episode and annoying to me -- why couldn't she have just said "Ok, i'm not satisfied, let's work on this?" I think it's a ridiculous argument and detrimental to anyone trying to argue the case *for* pre-marital sex to say that its a determining factor in whether or not to marry. That's just silly. Sex is an amazingly intimate and pleasurable experience that I feel doesn't have to be, but can be shared between two partners at any stage of a relationship. I don't advocate casual sex, not my style at all, but if it's done responsibly and with a knowledge and acceptance of the possible consequences, then to each his own. But it's a moot point since as Chris and others have pointed out, the real issue is whether you approve of it in the first place.
Posts: 3516 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I see sex as something that should happen only when a major life commitment has been made. To me, many marriages don't fall into that and many non-marriages do. However, this is my standard for me, and not for others, so I'm pretty much okay with people doing as they choose in the matter.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote: The quote suggests that your attitude towards pre-marital sex will determine your approval or disapproval, which to me seems pretty obvious.
The obviousness of that conclusion is exactly what I am disputing.
I have been trying to make a point about marriage that absolutely nothing to do with my attitude toward pre-marital sex. I am disturbed that what I believe is a legitimate point is being dismissed as being an argument against pre-marital sex. It isn’t. If two adults who have no religious or other commitments that forbid them from engaging in pre-marital sex choose to do so, I have no opinion on it one way or another. But if two people aren’t sure enough that they want to be married that they would stay together regardless of whatever sexual problems might arise in their relationship THEY SHOULDN’T GET MARRIED. Before OR after engaging in sex.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm not saying that people shouldn't have premarital sex. I'm not making that decision for them. I'm saying that trying to make an excuse for it that it will somehow strengthen a future marriage is bogus and flawed, just like the idea of cohabitating is. Have sex all you want; live together all you want. Just don't attempt to use poor justification to do it. Do it because you want to, and because you put no stake in the moral strictures against it, religious or no. Just don't try to make it look like you are doing it for a reason that has logically shown to be flawed reasoning.
Posts: 346 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Problems with premarital sex, in order of importance (in my view):
1. The effect on possible unborn babies - Premarital sex, no matter how safe you think you are, may force you into choosing between killing an unborn human fetus or bringing a child into a bad and/or unstable situation. This is a EXTREMELY serious ethical risk - in short, you may be risking a form of murder.
2. The effect on you, your present relationships, and your future relationships - I've seen many relationships destroyed by sex, and very few helped by it. I've also noticed that past sexual relationships tend to be big liabilities that cannot be erased.
3. The effect on society - People are more inclined to do what everyone else is doing, so if somone thinks everyone else is having sex, they will be much more likely to do it. Thus, your decision to have sex impacts others, and even if you somehow know how to avoid problems (1) and (2), your decision (when combined with the decisions of others) may lead someone less wise to make a huge mistake. And I would suspect it is the more foolish people who are more likely to blindly do what everyone else is doing - also the same people most likely not to take precautions to avoid the dangers of (1) and (2).
I believed these three problems far outweigh any "trying out a mate" benefits you might get from sex. If your marriage decision hinges so much on your partner's sexual capabilities that you'd be willing to risk so much, then you probably should NOT be getting married to them. Wait until you care about someone so much that you'd stick with them even if they weren't up to par sexually. After all, if your partner has a sexual problem once you tie the knot and can't perform as you'd expect them to, you are stuck.
Posts: 8120 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote: People are more inclined to do what everyone else is doing,
I will never be convinced by any argument stating that my doing something will effect society. People make decisions ON THEIR OWN. if they want to use society as a straw man (is that the correct usage of that term?) then they're just fooling themselves!
posted
Wouldn't one of the qualities of a 'responsible adult' be that they take into account the affect their actions have on society?
Posts: 4655 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote: Wouldn't one of the qualities of a 'responsible adult' be that they take into account the affect their actions have on society
I'm sorry, but that argument washes about as well as the argument that you have to have sex before marriage to judge compatibility. It's such a lazy tactic to take, fighting on the side of "But if you do it, then this other person will do it, and then everyone they know will do it, and then society will falter and break!" I look at that with about as much disdain as I do the argument that homosexual marriage will destroy the institution of marriage. It's just poor logic.
I don't have pre-marital sex because it's socially acceptable, or because i know other people who do it. I have it because i want to. Novel concept, eh?
posted
I agree with the points that dkw, Leonide, and Chris Bridges have made.
On another note, I actually participated in a discussion! For a while, anyway. I have an opinion!! Whoa. Excuse me, I'm going to go sit down. All the blood is rushing into my head.
Posts: 4816 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I only read the first ten posts, but here are a few questions:
What if one never had sex until after marriage? The would not have a "measuring stick" to see how good it was. It would simply be sex. They wouldn't know what better sex was because they have never had better sex. Why would one want try to find a better mate when in their eyes, their mate already suits them just fine?
Oh, and dkw, I know most--if not all--Christian Churches believe that premarital sex is against God's will, but is there somewhere in the Bible that specifically states it? I personally haven't seen it after much searching in my Bible.
[ February 02, 2004, 01:17 AM: Message edited by: Nick ]
Posts: 4229 | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged |
That is very very untrue. It's been experimentally proven by psychologists that people in a group are much more inclined to do what other members of that group are doing. Plus, it just makes sense, doesn't it? I mean, haven't you noticed how all of a sudden a whole bunch of people in certain groups will dress in the same style, or will start talking the same way, or will act similarly? Haven't you heard of peer pressure or role models? Haven't you noticed that if you swear around a little kid, they might be inclined to use that word too?
The effect is there. If you do something, then you should expect it might cause your brother, or your friend, or your daughter to think about doing it too. It's your choice whether or not you wish to care about what sort of model you are for others, but that doesn't mean the choice not to care is any less wrong.
Posts: 8120 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
In any case, people really like to think that they make decisions on their own, especially important ones. And it's a little insulting to be told "You did X because of [insert all sort of external factors here]." I know I certainly like to think that I make my own decisions, and I got really mad at my parents when they accused me of doing things that were wrong because of societal pressure.
I like to think that I make the decisions that are right for me, not what's "right" for me to do, given what everybody tells me.
Posts: 1592 | Registered: Jan 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think I'm going to weigh in, since I tend to poke around these kinds of threads.
Lets see. I'm a 23 year old female, who does not believe that pre-marital abstinence is the right choice for her. I certainly have friends who are abstaining. And it's their choice.
In my opinion, it is possible to truly know yourself with respect to sexuality and become comfortable with your body and with a partner before marriage. It's not mandatory for you to have pre-marital sex, and it likely isn't the best option for many people.
What's more important than this whole sex or no sex thing, are the underlying factors. Everyone in a sexual (even if it's "everything but that") relationship needs to learn about their own sexuality, their own bodies, and become happy with their selves. That's what needs to happen before marriage. Some people read that as meaning they have to have sex beforehand. Well, that works for some people.
I have had several "sexual relationships." They have taught me to love my body. And I appreciate those experiences. It is the right choice for me.
Posts: 1892 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The only way to find out about sexual compatibility is to have sex. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I'm not sure whether to laugh at this, act confused, or just shake my head and sigh.
So, what happens if the person who fulfills you intellectually, spiritually, and emotionally is terrible in bed?
Take care of the first three, and the last will work itself out." -------------------------------------------------
Well, I do recall someone once relating a quote about this, the quote went something like this, "When the sex in a relationship is good [compatable] it's a relatively minor part of a relationship, but when it's bad, it's everything."
Agree or disagree w/that quote as you will. I think it does mention the power that sex can wield in a relationship though. As I often am, I seem to have found myself firmly on Lalo's side in this argument, however I can certainly respect the other view point (something I can't always do)on this issue considering the powerful impact sex can have on a relationship. I just happen to essentially fall almost entirely (on what I've read) on Lalo's side of the issue.
Perhaps my being a lapsed Lutheran (at least in terms of attending Church) has something to do with it, and perhaps growing up in the bay area may also have heavily shaped my view points. It's always interesting to see how thoroughly different the perspectives are in here compared to what surrounds me.
Anyway in answer to: "2 questions. (1) Do you agree that premarital sex is an important part of determining compatibility? (2) Are you married?"
1.) Yes. Though the degree of importance I might be inclined to argue (I think it's important, but not enough to force a veto in a relationship I was very happy in, w/a few potential exceptions).
2.) No. Was engaged in college but that fell apart, so I've been single for a while now.
Posts: 752 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
You gotta admit that sex is by far the best bang for your buck (pardon the pun) as far as entertainment goes.
I have premarital sex for economic reasons. A movie costs about $9--way out of my price range. But condoms cost about 50 cents. Handcuffs, $2.99--and sometimes they're reusable.
Posts: 5264 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote: perhaps growing up in the bay area may also have heavily shaped my view points.
There a lot of different bays in the world. So I can better understand why your upbringing in the the "bay area" might effect your view, could you tell me which bay you're talking about please?
quote:It doesn't change the reality that people who are planning to enter a marriage who decide it's okay to share the intimacy of marriage before the committment is made are far more likely to have an unsuccessful marriage than not.
But is it because they cohabited or because the sort of people who'd consider cohabiting tend to be the sort of people who'd be more likely to divorce (for example, because they've got no religious community to disapprove of them, no god to tell them not to divorce, that marriage is holy and eternal, etc.)? If it's the mindset behind the decision and not the decision itself that's the cause of higher divorce rates, correlation is a weak argument against cohabitation.
Posts: 2443 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Considering the different spreads of people over different social and economic backgrounds, ae, I would consider your question more wishful thinking than a realistic question. Like I said, I'm not saying to abstain or not, I'm just pointing out the flaw in trying to justify not by saying it somehow makes you a better candidate for mariage.
Posts: 346 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: It's been experimentally proven by psychologists that people in a group are much more inclined to do what other members of that group are doing.
I know. I took psychology. That doesn't mean I didn't think it was sad and pathetic that they did, even if it was a natural reaction, and even if I might have had the same one in similar circumstances. The point is, no one was forcing those people to do "what everyone else was doing." It was a choice, subconscious or not, to be influenced by the majority.
quote:The effect is there. If you do something, then you should expect it might cause your brother, or your friend, or your daughter to think about doing it too. It's your choice whether or not you wish to care about what sort of model you are for others, but that doesn't mean the choice not to care is any less wrong.
You know, I have a really good friend whose parents were less than ideal, and who blamed and pretty much continues to blame them for all her insecurity and self-doubt. Says there's nothing she can do, those insecurities were placed in her from childhood and their too ingrained...blahblahblah. There's comes a point in life where blaming other people just doesn't wash anymore. When you're a kid, you can't know any better, but once you realize what's going on you say: "Hey, I make my own decisions, and I'm deciding not to act out my parent's belittling of me." Doesn't make it easy, but it certainly makes it POSSIBLE. Even imperative.
That's like saying that we can't have movies depicting suicide (even though it happens) because it might make someone out there do it themselves. That's just poor. honestly, people -- if they were going to do it, they would have found a reason for it sooner or later. We all act in accordance with what we feel, and look for outside sources for *validation.* If we don't get it somewhere, we'll get it somewhere else. It's human nature -- but you can't go around blaming society or your mom or South Park for making you do "bad things." That's just irresponsible.
Posts: 3516 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:In my opinion, it is possible to truly know yourself with respect to sexuality and become comfortable with your body and with a partner before marriage.
In what way does 'knowing yourself' eliminate the dangers of premarital sex? That's like saying you know yourself, so it's okay for you to drink and drive.
quote:It is the right choice for me.
You say 'for me' as if the decision only effects you. Is it also the right choice for the baby you might end up having (or killing) as a result?
Posts: 8120 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, from what I'm seeing, most of those arguing against pre-marital sex seem to view it as an inherently bad thing. Honestly, I think it's sad that we as a society teach our children from a very young age that sex is some kind of dirty, shameful thing.
Assuming that premarital sex _isn't_ an inherently "evil" or "dirty" thing, are there any studies about divorce rates vs. premarital sex? The only ones I've seen on this thread are about cohabitation, which is another matter altogether....
Posts: 9057 | Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
Whoa. Excuse me, I'm going to go sit down. All the blood is rushing into my head.
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Evil]](graemlins/evil.gif)
