Sexual Abstinence

What is the goal of the program?

The goal of this particular program is to have people be abstinent from sex until they are married.

I am asking those who advocate this how far do they think this should go. Should one die a virgin if they never marry?

I'm seriously asking.

Also, my other 2 questions, out of curiosity of how having sex or not before marriage has effected others.

I am so so glad I didn't wait.

Both pre-husband, so I had a clue as to what I was doing before I met him; and with him, so I knew what to expect before we made a lifelong commitment.

My parents were the kind to buy me condoms and birth control when I was a teenager, which freaked me out, but in that kind of an environment I waited WAYYYYY longer than most of my peers.

I really think abstinence movements are doomed because of the whole hot state thing. We are completely different people when we're in a cold state (everyday normal nothing special) than when we're in a hot state (very scared, very angry, very horny, etc.) If you're not giving kids the tools to deal with those hot states -- if the options are "no" or nothing -- then kids are more likely to have unsafe sex.

Don't forget until fairly recent times having sex without a strong committment were a wonderful way for women to ruin their lives by having babies out of wedlock and most people married right out of high school as a result.

Most women also have little ability to earn enough of a living to support a family with their paychecks alone.

Only some changes in society attitudes and must better birh control technology change that for the "better".

The question here is not how we should act... but what should we tell preteens.

There is a difference between the discussion you would have with your twenty-two year old unmarried college student, and what you would tell your twelve year old.

What does this sexual abstinence mean exactly from a physiological-mechanical point of view?

Wet dreams?
Solo masturbation?
Mutual masturbation?
Mutual manual stimulation?
Solo stimulation of secondary sexual zones?
Mutual stimulation of secondary sexual zones?
Solo watching of pornography?
Mutual watching of pornography?
Naughty explicit love letters?

Given the arguments for moral relativism and against moral absolutism, I claim that sexual relativism has the same merits.

No sex that could produce a child would be a good start point with precautions to prevent STDs added on.

Beyond that point who care......................

Well, it depends I think.

I wouldn't tell even a twelve-year-old simply "don't have sex," period. I would say all the reasons that I think it's a bad idea and why I strongly discourage sex at that age. But I'd also I'd also tell him or her what they'd need to know to keep things as safe as possible if they happen to find themselves in a situation where they want to go further than I want them to go. (Ugh, I'm so not looking forward to high school....)

At any rate, a lot of what I object to with the abstinence programs is that they're anti-condoms, anti-birth control, anti- any sort of plan B -- just "don't have sex" and nothing else. I think kids need more information than that. (Even as young as 12.)

Let me rephrase it.
What is to be accomplished by this abstinence?

I agree with you (mostly).

My disagreement is with the way the argument is being framed. You could believe that 12 year old shouldn't have sex and that unmarried 25 year olds should. There is no contradiction here. You could even believe that telling a 12 year old that sex is only for marriage is a good way to keep them from having sex (even if you accept this behavior in a 25 year old).

All I am asking is that the issues be kept separate.

If the goal were to keep preteens from having sex, would you feel this were an accomplishment?

I don't quite get what you mean.

Fairly recently?

Depends on how you view what recent means.

I'm 51.
People were using bc pills and condoms regularly when I was starting to get interested in sex, in the mid to late 70's.

If by recent you mean turn of the last century or before, I think most people are pretty much over that.
My first husband was 16 years older than I am. So he was about the age I am now when we first married.
I asked him once how many dates he and other people around his age would go on (when young, meaning I guess early 20's, late teens) before they would have sex.
He said, "I don't know, it just depended. Sometimes on the 2nd date, sometimes on the 4th or 5th." He thought a little more and said that definately by the 4th or 5th, because by that time you knew if you got along well, and either you'd take it to the next level, or the dating would stop.

That made sense to me. Not the sex part so much, but if I've been out with someone 5 times, I must like them, or I wouldn't be hanging around with them.



You last sentence about getting married right out of high school makes my point.
People got married, whether they found the right person or not, because they were, as soz said hot.

So, you marry to get sex, and wake up next to someone that you may have been compatible with when you were 17....but now you're 25, 30....

I have to be honest, I have had sex with a man or two that were absolutely AWFUL in bed.

Even if I had had nothing to compare them to at the time, I still would have known they were AWFUL. I don't buy that "well, you wouldn't know any better" Nice guys (or I wouldn't have slept with them), but, did I say, AWFUL in bed.

I know it's an old expression, but I'm gonna try those shoes on before I buy them.

That other expression about why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free? Well, that goes both ways, and I can't help it if some people just give it away.

Anyway, what soz said rings so true.
It seems so unfair to deny a person one of the most pleasurable experiences, because you want to control them.
Give them condoms, give them birth control pills, make sure they use them.

If I had a daughter who wanted to have sex, I not only would get her on the pill, but would insist on watching her put it in her mouth and swallow it each day.....at least until she was married...

You could always advise her to abstain from sex with men and have sex with women instead. If the goal is to prevent STDs and unwanted pregnancies, clearly lesbian sex is the way to go. I'm surprised the abstinence-only types don't propagate it more.

On a related but slightly different note, how would you see it if you had a son who wanted to have sex? Would you buy him condoms and insist on watching him slap them on before he gets down to business with his girlfriend -- or boyfriend, as the case may be?

"So what is "sex"?
Bill Clinton swore he didn't have "sex with that woman" and many believed it because he didn't have INTERCOURSE with her!!

There's a book out called, "Oral Sex is the the new Goodnight Kiss" - the kids of today don't think anything of oral sex, yet claim to follow true "abstinence" because they have not yet bumped nasties with each other.

I'd make the little bugger practice his condom placement technique in front of me until he could reliably do it with one hand.

On a carrot of course!!! I'm not bent.

If he couldn't handle the embarrassment, he'd not be ready to have sex!


The pill is not enough. Don't protect against STDs.

This is true Thomas. On Friday my step-daughter is coming to visit for a few days with a friend. I heard her father say to her on the phone a few days ago when firming up the schedule "I don't want to hear that you two were sleeping together while you were here. That would make Liz really mad. You know there's 2 beds in the room you'll be staying in, 1 for each of you."
He told me her response was "oh daaaaaad... you know I'm not going to fool around on Liz."

If I had a son? Yes, I'd want to know condoms were with him at all times. Unfortunately, it would be harder to know if he used them all the time, if he made sure there were no holes, etc.

Of course I'd want my daughter to make use of condoms too.

You would be good at sexual education, Chai

If you want to know exactly what their goal is, you can listen to the interview on npr.org. It only been since yesterday (or was it the day before)

If you were to ask me what is to be accomplished, I'd say it's acheiving control over a large population, treating them all exactly alike, regardless of their maturity level, and situation.

It is very important to control the actions of people who would have unprotected, dangerous sex with little or no forethought to the consequences, as those who would be able to handle the responsibility.

I'm still wondering if the control can be released after the person has lived x amount of days on this planet, even if they don't possess a marriage certificate.

On a related note, what if one divorces or is widowed? Are they supposed to remain abstinent until they remarry?
Or is it that once you've tasted the fruit, it's never forbidden?

I hear people talking on abstinence, not just in the news, but in day to day life. What exactly are the real ground rules, once you leave the realm of under 21?