Don’t marry a virgin
From a Slate.com advice column:
My wife and I married about three months ago and had dated for almost three and a half years before getting married. We both believe sex is for marriage only and abstained during our relationship. She is a virgin. I am not (I made my abstinence decision later in life). It was hard to keep my hands to myself while we dated, but I could do it partly because I knew marriage was on the horizon. Here’s the problem: We have still never had sex… We did discuss this before marriage and I was under the impression that it would happen. In fact, she even thought it would happen during the honeymoon. Every time we tried, she freaked out and started to cry.
I guess this wouldn’t be a problem if the groom were a virgin too, because then they wouldn’t even realize they were miserable. The moral of the story is that unless you live in a club-wielding, pre-modern society where virginity is glorified, fetishized, and given a monetary value, it’s best to get it out of the way before the matrimony so that afterwards you can proceed with the celebratory humping, forthwith.
Tom wrote:
Yup, my mom always said, “You don’t buy a car before giving it a test-drive, do you?”
Posted on 16-Sep-06 at 10:32 pm | Permalink
dave wrote:
And what a test-drive your mom gave.
ZING!
Posted on 17-Sep-06 at 5:55 pm | Permalink
Cisco wrote:
That reminds me of a wonderful article on the ‘test drive’ analogy:
“Here’s the problem with the car analogy: the car doesn’t have hurt feelings if the driver dumps it back at the used car lot and decides not to buy it. The analogy works great if you picture yourself as the driver. It stinks if you picture yourself as the car.” http://www.boundless.org/2001/departments/beyond_buddies/a0000498.html
Posted on 19-Sep-06 at 8:28 pm | Permalink
pjk wrote:
just to clarify, I myself am not in favor of comparing women to cars. machismo is not my forte, and in fact, the whole “test drive” thing is a problem for another reason: sex with a certain person often gets better the more you do it, even if it sucks the first few times. there’s a learning curve. this is not the case with cars.
my original point was that virginity is not glorious, it’s awkward and possibly associated with a certain psychosis.
so get your freak on. everyone.
Posted on 20-Sep-06 at 7:03 am | Permalink
Tealizzy wrote:
Well, I hate to quarrel with you and your acerbic tongue, suspecting I’ll get the worst of it, but I have to state that the fact that both my husband and I were virgins on our wedding night did nothing to prevent celebratory humping. And it was nice to have that ‘learning curve’ all to ourselves. Completely unselfconscious.
Of course, there are people who have ‘issues’ with sex, but waiting until marriage only delays your finding out about the problem, it doesn’t create it. She should have been in therapy as soon as they got back from their honeymoon.
But then I’m operating on the assumption that he actually loves her and would consequently continue loving her even if he’d known what he would find when he ‘took her for a drive.’ I feel it’s a case for taking the car to the shop, not back to the dealer. Call me crazy.
Posted on 20-Sep-06 at 10:06 am | Permalink
pjk wrote:
crazy.
Posted on 20-Sep-06 at 10:44 am | Permalink
TheAmber wrote:
I don’t believe in waiting for marriage and I agree with Tealizzy, to a point. It is my understanding that those who wait for marriage can and usually do have fulfilling sex lives. That said I have to wonder what kind of abstinence the people in the article were practicing. If the new wife is comfortable being sexual with her husband, but freaks out about penetration some couples counseling and a good OB/GYN should be able to sort out their issues (It could be a medical problem). The reason I ask about the type of abstinence is that if they were doing the whole ‘pre-marital hand holding is a sin’ and ‘our first kiss is at the alter’ thing then I would say that the abstinence is the cause of their problem. They are foolish to think that a wedding would prepare her emotionally for such an extreme increase in intimacy. I say more power to couples who choose to save genital contact and nudity for marriage, even if that is not how I choose to live. As long as they are unafraid to be sexual together (things like the good, old fashioned make-out session and maybe some over the clothes groping) they shouldn’t have issues. The people who go for extreme abstinence are those who most often treat sex and sexuality as blight on humanity and get what they deserve when they have crappy sex lives when they are married.
Posted on 20-Sep-06 at 12:13 pm | Permalink
pjk wrote:
well shit, now you’re all gettin’ all serious on me. can’t we just have a nice inflamatory polemic and leave it at that?
and why does abstinence have to get all clinical? “nudity and genital contact”? what about partial nudity? partial genital contact? dry humping? people engaging in healthy activities like these are likely to have no problems once the preacher says “go!”
other than that, I don’t really have anything else to say about this, because I don’t have an opinion on the right way to practice sexuality. I do know that the WRONG way is to be scared of it, or spread horror stories about the AIDS virus slipping through latex.
and as my final word: married, single-partner christians always bring up this thing about, “at least I don’t have to bring my past partners to the the marriage bed with me.” but the only people this would ever happen to are people who, a) feel guilty for having had other partners, or b) aren’t completely happy with the current partner. in either case, it’s not healthy, and you need help.
Posted on 20-Sep-06 at 12:46 pm | Permalink
Tealizzy wrote:
I agree with Amber that the degree of pre-marital physical intimacy is something that needs to be checked into. You can’t expect to jump from ‘we’re not holding hands’ to sex in one night. I suppose you could just postpone sex but it’s always seemed to me that figuring it out (and having lots of it) is what that honeymoon is for. I personally am very concerned about those who insist their first kiss will be at the altar. It seems like asking for trouble at best. A gradual progression of the physical relationship (along with the emotional etc.) is the natural way for these things to progress, and while we can argue about where the marital line should be drawn, I don’t think any of us can be surprised if it goes badly when people try to rush things.
That said, I have to add, pjk, that I didn’t bring up the past-partners-in-the-marriage-bed thing.
I was actually not referring to issues of guilt or sexual fulfillment but to the delightful and unequalled freedom of two newly-married virgins. It’s hard to explain to someone who hasn’t been there and won’t be, but it’s not about guilt. It’s about intimacy.
Posted on 23-Sep-06 at 9:13 pm | Permalink