RPGWW

by **SALSAlys** » Thu Oct 02, 2003 12:37 pm

<FONT FACE="Verdana,Arial" SIZE=2>Righty-o. I know we have had polls and stuff in the past about whether or not you're a virgin, and we likely have had this poll before somewhere, but now I'm curious, I guess. *shrug*

Basically, this is about not only whether you are a virgin, but if you plan on keeping it until (insert event). =D

And for my own response:

I plan on keeping it until I'm married. Call it a wedding present to my intended. And if I end up marrying a girl, yay for Canada!</FONT><FORM method=post action="http://p068.ezboard.com/frpgww60462frm11.processVote?topicID=579.topic"><table border=0 cellpadding=3 cellspacing=0 width="55%"><tbody><tr><td><input type="radio" name="choice" value="1"><FONT FACE="Verdana,Arial" SIZE=2>Not a virgin, no regrets.</FONT></td></tr><tr><td><input type="radio" name="choice" value="2"><FONT FACE="Verdana,Arial" SIZE=2>Not a virgin, wish remained a virgin.</FONT></td></tr><tr><td><input type="radio" name="choice" value="3"><FONT FACE="Verdana,Arial" SIZE=2>Virgin, plan on not being one as soon as possible.</FONT></td></tr><tr><td><input type="radio" name="choice" value="4"><FONT FACE="Verdana,Arial" SIZE=2>Virgin, plan on saving sex for marriage.</FONT></td></tr><tr><td><input type="radio" name="choice" value="5"><FONT FACE="Verdana,Arial" SIZE=2>Virgin, plan on saving it for someone special.</FONT></td></tr></tbody></table><P><input type=submit value="Vote"></form>Show results</FONT>

by **pd Rydia** » Thu Oct 02, 2003 2:57 pm

Number four a diddle. Among other things, I believe that it's ideal that both partners start on the same level of sexual experience --none-- and learn together. <p>

<small><center><font color=navy>Take these broken wings
And learn to fly again, learn to live so free
And when we hear the voices sing
The book of love will open up and let us in</font>

{RPGWW -- an RPing community} -- {Rydia's Pocket Dragon Encyclopedia} -- {StarDragon Oekaki}</small></center></p>

by **Choark** » Thu Oct 02, 2003 3:04 pm

Virgin but only kinda by choice. Generally I'd just concentrated on the work I had to do and never went looking for any sex or whatnot - however this doesn't mean I'd of said no if something came my way - it just hasn't yet.

Generlly I've always wanted it to mean something though - rather then just getting laid - so no one nights by choice - probably. Marriage ain't really that important to me so I ain't saving it for that - but if it happens that way then eh *shrugs* ain't going to get a complaint from me.

by **Banjooie** » Thu Oct 02, 2003 5:20 pm

Marriage to me doesn't mean as much as it should, likely. I'm beginning to see it more as just a legalities issue. Thus, I'd save it for somebody special.

by **Archmage144** » Thu Oct 02, 2003 5:58 pm

What Banj said. Arguably, I've found someone special enough already. =P <p>

</div>

</p>

by **Wolfbelly** » Thu Oct 02, 2003 8:19 pm

technically I want to lose it as fast as possible. However, I've had a couple ... 'opportunities' that I've passe up due to my having some self respect.

by **Vampire Jester Jinx** » Thu Oct 02, 2003 10:28 pm

*shrugs* Basically what Dia said to an extent. But a big factor in this issue is my religious beliefs. I believe in waiting until marriage. ^-^ And that's something i've kept fast too, and hope to keep up.

<p>

"Oh the funky horror!" ~ Happy Noodle Boy</div></p>

by **EKDS5k** » Thu Oct 02, 2003 10:47 pm

Lost it a month ago. No regrets.

I disagree with the "save it for marriage" line of thought. You wouldn't buy a car without test driving it first, would you? What if you get into bed and there's zero chemistry between the two of you? Being bad in bed is one thing (hell I'm no superstar), but laying there with no sparks whatsoever is not something I think I could live a lifetime of marriage with.

by **FlamingDeth** » Fri Oct 03, 2003 5:22 am

Doc neglects to look at the religious aspect, and the fact that some people just look at their morals differently, and stuff.

Also: No, and semi-regrets, as I was planning on #4 and it didn't work out quite that way. <p>

I am an <s>arrogant</s> elitist bastard.

And now, since I want to be unique like everybody else, quotes:
"People don't seem to realize, it wasn't a powerful ass poke. It was a powerful poke, to the ass!" ~ Lord McBastard
"So what you're saying is that Nintendo and Sony are in league with each other, and possibly the Red Skull?" ~ EKDS5K

</p>

by **SuperRube** » Fri Oct 03, 2003 7:07 pm

I was planning on number four or whatever, but I really didn't want the sexual tension to explode my brain. <p>

"Carrying a ham into a room, Mr. Connery says, 'hon mono.' It basically means that the ham he carries is genuine or real. We expect nothing less."</p>

by **EKDS5k** » Fri Oct 03, 2003 7:43 pm

Everything in my previous post was either my experiences, my opinions, or a question. I neglected nothing.

by **Animala** » Sat Oct 04, 2003 12:56 am

Test driving a car is an interesting euphemism for sex.

Speaking to that issue, though, I don't believe the scenario you described is particularly likely for me, because I don't think "chemistry" is independent of all other qualities I like about a woman.

'sides, it's worked for too many people I know for me to believe the odds are that badly against it.

-White Knight <p>

Behold! Sig figs!</p>

by **Waldorf Nikki** » Sat Oct 04, 2003 2:51 pm

This is kinda weird, so bare with me.. *Takes deep breath*

I picked number one. I strongly agree with Doc. "What if you get into bed and there's zero chemistry between the two of you?" Sex isn't everything in a relationship/marriage, but it is a bit of a perk. Take me and Steve for example. We were going to wait untill marriage. We decided after five years(we were together for six) we were ready. Steve and I had absolutly no luck with the whole sex thing. The chemistry, well, it sucked. (Sorry Steve!) Say we were still together and did get married. There would of been quite a few troubles. I hope this is making sense. I can say I have no regrets, if anything I can say I have a little experience. I also feel sex is something that can only be done with someone you love and are emotionaly attached to. I can't see how people can go around doing it when they don't have any feelings for the other person. I guess thats it. <p>------------------

I hypnotize you.

Dare to be stupid..

</p>

by **Wolfbelly** » Sat Oct 04, 2003 10:57 pm

Quote:
I can't see how people can go around doing it when they don't have any feelings for the other person. I guess thats it.

I can, but that's just me.

by **WhiteShadow** » Sun Oct 05, 2003 6:07 am

I held back from one or two oppurtunities, and am still a virgin, mostly due to the looking for "someone special" angle.

Whether there's such a stigma about sex after your first time, I don't know, but there's this whole thing about "the first time" and being "the one" and taking a girl's virginity.

I blame society, really. <p>-----------------------------------------------------
"To fall, to fall... Glorious!"</p>

by **BrainWalker** » Sun Oct 05, 2003 5:00 pm

Well, this is a bit of a sticky wicket, here.

For all my crazy innuendo in chat, and participation in discussions about sex, and generally mild horndoggery, I really think that sex can't be just sex. It's gotta be about the love. In that respect, it's definately gotta be saved for someone really special.

I'm not sure if I'm a virgin or not. It depends on your definition... if we're going by the purely textbook definition, then no, I've never actually [insert euphaism for "having sex" here]. But what about other sexual activity? I haven't done much mind you, but more than nothing. Yes, she was someone really special.

I'm a passionate, physical person. It's why I hug with such enthusiasm. Therefore, it's not surprising that I wouldn't stick to the "save sex for marriage" philosophy. Sex is an expression of love, and therefore, if you really love someone, I don't think you need a piece of paper to tell you it's okay to go for it. Of course, marriage is more than a piece of paper, especially to a man of religion. I'm just saying that you don't need to be married to someone to be in love with them.

Edit: Also, Dia made a good point about experience. <p><div style="text-align:center">

</div></p>Edited by: [url=http://pub30.ezboard.com/brpgww60462.showUserPublicProfile?gid=brainwalker>BrainWalker</A] 

at: 10/5/03 5:02 pm

by **Phil** » Sun Oct 05, 2003 11:54 pm

You test drive cars. You do NOT test drive people. People are not cars. They are not objects. This is the worst comparison ever. Bleh.

As for marriage, I look at it as something more metaphysical. I do believe in metaphysical bonds, and really I think it's the only bond that means anything in the grand scheme of things.

by **SALSAlys** » Mon Oct 06, 2003 12:29 pm

Mm. I guess that why I am saving it for marriage is because... well, I'm not even that deeply religious, I guess, but it's just a kind of goal for me. I want to ensure that it IS something special, and that my husband/wife knows that I've been saving it for THEM. I want to make it... yeah, a wedding present. I want to learn that aspect of sexuality with my life partner. It's not that I look down on people who do have sex before marriage, but it's just something personal.

Like... I dunno. Guess I don't see anything WRONG with premarital sex, especially if it is someone you love, but I just don't see enough right with it.

As for actual 'chemistry'... dunno. As a virgin, I have no clue about this, but can't hugs or kisses suffice for clues as to that? Or something again, you learn? 9.9;;

by **EKDS5k** » Mon Oct 06, 2003 7:56 pm

Quote:
You test drive cars. You do NOT test drive people. People are not cars. They are not objects. This is the worst comparison ever. Bleh.

It's an analogy. I did not say people are cars. I compared premarital sex to test driving them. People make these kinds of comparisons all the time. You just disagree with it.

by **Phil** » Tue Oct 07, 2003 12:44 am

You're absolutely right. I disagree with it very much. Comparing people to objects is something that I never feel is a valid analogy, and I consider it demeaning. You should never look at something as intimate as sex as a method of test driving somebody. I think that if you have to start having sex before you know if you want to spend the rest of your life with somebody else, then there's something seriously the matter.

by **EKDS5k** » Tue Oct 07, 2003 12:51 am

And I don't think that. I think that I want that kind of intimacy with someone before I decide whether or not I want to spend the rest of my life with them. I also think you should stop telling me how to think.

by **Wolfbelly** » Wed Oct 08, 2003 12:53 pm

Woah! Why so much value on sex? It's just fucking. Despite the fact that this wasn't Doc's point, and that Phil brought it up, I think Doc's analogy for 'test driving' people would be a great way to clear up confusion, and make the world a better place. It wouldn't be bad for anyone because both parties would be test driving each other. Is that so wrong?

Bah, I'm not incoherent enough. Where's that Rum?

by **PriamNevhausten** » Wed Oct 08, 2003 6:01 pm

I disagree with Lloyd, and agree heartily with Doc. Allow me to put a better spin on it.

There are four major parts to a marital relationship.
1) Love
2) Money
3) Lifestyle
4) Sex

If there is too much of a conflict between two people on any of these issues, that pillar will fall and the entire stack will topple. If there is no love, there is no reason for marriage. If the money is an issue, then marriage is often abandoned for the simple sake of survival. If the lifestyles conflict too much (i.e. he's a trucker but she hates travelling), then things will naturally split apart. And if the sex does not work, then one or both partners will go unfufilled in what is one of the most basic human drives, next to the need for food.

Almost all people take the whole 'dating' time to explore the first three, and ensure that they are working before moving on to marriage. So why not work with #4? You've taken all that time to get to know your potential mate better, so why roll the dice on such a crucial matter? As optimistic as I traditionally am about such things, I do not endorse people getting into marital relationships without having had sex first. They are taking a very big committment and holding a match under it, hoping that it won't catch fire. I say, if you take the committment seriously, you will get to know the WHOLE person. And that INCLUDES his/her sexual self.

Now, for Lloyd's point. Sex is not always 'just fucking.' It can be a very romantic, deep, spiritual experience. Just ask anyone who's made love to someone for whom they have genuine affection. There are some things that sex can bring out that other activities just can't do as well, and the sharing, mutually giving aspect of sex helps to create interpersonal connections quite well.

That said, if the persons involved have the right attitude and level of maturity, it is possible for sex to JUST be sex. The right conditions have to be set, but these things DO happen. Anyone who disagrees can speak to me directly either here or on AIM, and I will vouch personally. <p><span style="font-size:xx-small;">"It's in the air, in the headlines in the newspapers, in the blurry images on television. It is a secret you have yet to grasp, although the first syllable has been spoken in a dream you cannot quite recall." --Unknown Armies</span></p>

by **Wolfbelly** » Thu Oct 09, 2003 2:44 am

I agree with Priam's final point, and would like to summarize the driving force behind my point by quoting one of Priam's points and providing a counterpoint.

Quote:
Sex is not always 'just fucking.' It can be a very romantic, deep, spiritual experience.

True, and sex is not always very romantic, deep, or spiritual. Sex can be either way, to steadfastly hold that it is either one or the other is closeminded and ignorant.

Now, your points on marriage ... well, I could go off on a rant on how marriage is an outdated concept and how it is no longer beneficial in our culture ... but I'll just leave it at that and save everyone a needless rant.

by **Choark** » Thu Oct 09, 2003 6:47 am

Nothing is needless if someone believes in it. As long as people believe in God then there will be room for marriages - as a marriage is the binding of two souls in the eyes of God - it signifies the commitment of forever. Other times its a way of pleasing family members who believe this - for others its the final step of commitment to one single person and you'd be surprised on how many people would fall apart because of this. - This is not always a good thing - but it isn't always a bad thing either. I doubt it will ever be outdated at all. That is my personal opinion.

The point is every relationship is different like every person is different and it MUST be sorted out by both people involved.

Also, I've been keeping out of this argument of sex before marriage for a reason BUT I will make one point now:

Not everyone enjoys sex and quite a few marriages it doesn't happen. To quite a few people (more then you perhaps relise) sex is not a driving force in there life at all. All sex is for is to have children and that is it. You'd be surprised on how many marriages are like this and are happy and "working" perfectly. So sometimes the sex is just not an issue for happiness at all.

Again - it all just depends on the people involved.

by **PriamNevhausten** » Thu Oct 09, 2003 6:16 pm

Cho brings valid points to the table. Of course, the whole 'check to see if sexual compatibility is there before marriage' thing falls flat on its face if both partners aren't terribly interested in the whole sexual thing, in a long term sense.

And it is true--if it makes you happy without causing any grief, then why not do it? If you can honestly say that sex is not important enough to break up a relationship even if it's quite bad, then getting married without it is quite logical. If it *is* significant to one or both partners, however, it would be folly to go into a committment without having checked that out, in my opinion.

Cho earns 1000 points, and a 'get out of Nazi'ing free' card. <p><span style="font-size:xx-small;">"It's in the air, in the headlines in the newspapers, in the blurry images on television. It is a secret you have yet to grasp, although the first syllable has been spoken in a dream you cannot quite recall." --Unknown Armies</span></p>

by **SorataYuy** » Fri Oct 10, 2003 3:29 am

Oddly, I'm a combo here. Saving it for someone special, who I'd hope to marry, or maybe have that someone be the one I -am- giving it to on that thing called the first night of the Honeymoon. And it is kind of important to me, but not so much that I'd be totally disturbed by it that she would only want to snuggle instead of sex. Sometimes, that's nice too, just as long as it's not every damned night^_~. <p>I BUKKAKE FOR JUSTICE!!!</p>

by **PriamNevhausten** » Fri Oct 10, 2003 4:02 am

On a side note, I know a couple who reportedly go at it twice a DAY. Or more. <p><span style="font-size:xx-small;">"It's in the air, in the headlines in the newspapers, in the blurry images on television. It is a secret you have yet to grasp, although the first syllable has been spoken in a dream you cannot quite recall." --Unknown Armies</span></p>

by **PopoSujo** » Wed Oct 15, 2003 11:05 pm

I am not a virgin.

I lost my virginity at the age of fifteen, and became very experienced very fast. Yes, we were in love. But after a while, sex is the only thing that I ever really wanted her for. I fell out of love really fast. We did it so much that I don't even remember my first time (yes, we did it that much).

The second woman is still very special in my life. Right now she is at a college that is seven hours away from me, and I took her virginity about a week before she moved. I love her exponentially more than I ever did my previous girlfriend, and I don't think I will be falling out of love any time soon.

Saving sex until marriage never even really crossed my mind. Of course, I was a horny young teenager with free access to...stuff.

I do believe that you need to love somebody to have sex with them, because that is the greatest gift you can really give somebody. People that just go around screwing wantonly must not be very emotional.

by **PriamNevhausten** » Thu Oct 16, 2003 4:20 am

Either that or in need enough that it doesn't matter. <p><span style="font-size:xx-small;">"It's in the air, in the headlines in the newspapers, in the blurry images on television. It is a secret you have yet to grasp, although the first syllable has been spoken in a dream you cannot quite recall." --Unknown Armies</span></p>

by **PopoSujo** » Thu Oct 16, 2003 7:57 am

If they're that in need, then they have their hands.

"Sex can wait, masterbate!"

by **PriamNevhausten** » Thu Oct 16, 2003 1:41 pm

See, this is the point where I realize no words can help you understand the predicament, and I stop trying. <p><span style="font-size:xx-small;">"It's in the air, in the headlines in the newspapers, in the blurry images on television. It is a secret you have yet to grasp, although the first syllable has been spoken in a dream you cannot quite recall." --Unknown Armies</span></p>

by **Blaze Yamato Spirit** » Fri Oct 24, 2003 6:45 pm

Just to get the poll back on track...

I'm saving it for someone special to me. It may or may not be that I'll not do it 'til after marriage, that really depends on my partner's feelings on the matter. <p>

"Pantient people can think while wearing pants. Inpantient people have to go free from pants or their brain stops working." ~ Myself on the definition of a spelling mistake.

Best Quote Ever: The treat of Keet grabbing his crotch worked last time, but... *shrugs*

Fiddle Reject: Â Â Â Â ...Shini?
Fiddle Reject: Â Â Â Â Your future sex life is none of your business.</p>

by **PriamNevhausten** » Mon Nov 03, 2003 7:24 pm

Since the Unspoken seems to be rife with nothing these days, I solicit Lloyd's aforementioned rant about Marriage's obsolescence. <p><span style="font-size:xx-small;">"It's in the air, in the headlines in the newspapers, in the blurry images on television. It is a secret you have yet to grasp, although the first syllable has been spoken in a dream you cannot quite recall." --Unknown Armies</span></p>

by **Teal Musing** » Mon Nov 03, 2003 10:36 pm

I'll second that solicitation... yes, I will.

<p>It's really tough to type with the ninja toddler climbing all over you!</p>

by **Wolfbelly** » Tue Nov 04, 2003 12:33 am

D'oh. Why'd I have to read this? Now I have to respond. Okay, I'll just vomit this out, and you can all pick apart the points later.

*sighs*

Okay, marriage is the unity between a couple for life. That is what marriage originally meant, and that is what it ideally is supposed to mean. Back in the day, women were nowhere near the same socioeconomic status as men were. They could not work for themselves, they could not own property, they could not be independant in our patriarchal society. Therefore, women needed to become married in order to "live the good life." Men needed to marry because bastard children were incapable of being heirs to their father's fortunes. Marriage served a distinct and inalienable purpose in that it resulted in a better standard of living for those involved.

But what about now? Society is primarily focused on independance of the self. We no longer restrict personal freedoms as we did in the days of yore. Now, any person can live independant of anyone else. The estate of the recently deceased can be willed away to anyone, regardless of bloodline. There is no more need for someone to get married, there is only a traditional reason to get married. Since there is no more need for marriage, we as a society ascribe value in order to retain its historical importance. So we say that marriage is all about marrying the one you love. Sure, that works ... but just because you love someone doesn't mean that you have to marry them.

by **GiftedRichard** » Thu Nov 06, 2003 8:19 am

I am a virgin, and plan on saving it for someone special.. Know I don't nessarly mean the person I am going to marry beacuse you don't have to marry someone to love them.

by **Tigergirl** » Tue Nov 11, 2003 12:57 am

(By the way I'm completly new here but I stopped by and read this and just had to respond)

Alright. I have the special someone in my life and I got by the book definition of virginty. Yes I am a virgin in every aspect. And I am waiting for the day, since we live so far apart, for us to be together. Basically I've saved my virginity for him and no one else can have that. I don't know why its so important, but to me its about loyalty. Though you don't always know when the person your with is your one and only forever and ever. Marriage? Bleh... marriage can mess up a relationship. I've seen it happen, so that does not matter.

Sex is an expression of love, and commintment. Something you give and recieve the whole time. Love comes along with sex, and though you can easily have sex without love that sexual experience is a very empty one.

by **SuperRube** » Tue Nov 11, 2003 1:05 am

It's amazing how people feel the need to drop in and add comments to threads like this irregardless to how long they've been a member of the community or whether or not their points have been brought up before. <p>

THE BROTHERHOOD OF ELITIST BASTARDS We're better then you. See if you can prove us otherwise.</p>

by **Tigergirl** » Tue Nov 11, 2003 1:12 am

Sorry *rolls eyes* Sheesh. If it bugs you so much just tell me so and I'll be on my way. I just thought that people wanted opinions and a survey polled here. Not about if your a newbie or not.

Everyone snap at the newb.. *sighs*

Who is online