This topic was brought up in the HPV vaccine thread, and I wanted to get everybody's opinion on it.

I think that sex before marriage is not necessarily a bad thing. I think it, along with living together, gives couples a chance to see what their marriage might be like. Sex is a huge part of marriage, and bad sex can undermine a marriage, IMO. Plus, it helps you figure out if what you are feeling is true love or just plain lust.

I personally believe that the push to make teens abstain until marriage may actually be contributing to the high divorce rate. If people think that they have to be married to have sex, I think they might rush into a marriage because they might not know the difference between lust and love. Take my former roommate, for example. She and her boyfriend dated for 4 years before they got married. To my knowledge, they were both virgins when they married. They separated within 6 months of marrying and were officially divorced the day before their first anniversary. I really believe that the disgrace in having sex before marriage and living together (he was Mormon) contributed to the failure of their marriage. I think that if they had been allowed to see what each other was truly like, apart from dates, they wouldn't have gotten married.

For me it is not so much about "looking away" from women, but we just really need to teach our sons how to respect women.

Oh, that's definitely true. I just think that there should be better ways of teaching respect for women than possibly inadvertently teaching that a woman's body is "bad".

I think part of what Laurend is getting at is that teaching a however old boy to look away from boobs is teaching him that you aren't allowed to look at boobs, rather than why not to look at boobs. I didn't read through the posts in detail so perhaps there was mention of some reason being given to the kid, but all I read was something along the lines of "trained to look away". It's completely normal for kids to look at others' bodies. They're curious. And they may ask, "Why are her boobs so small?" or maybe they see someone with boobs who looks like a man, and they want to know why. But it doesn't mean they're going to grow up into men who don't respect women.

Respect can be taught, to a degree. Looking away when you see something can be taught. Or, you can use one to get at the other.

I just don't see a connection between "you can't look at boobs" and "respect women". There's a difference between a man who sees you walk in somewhere and looks at YOU, including your boobs (because they can't magically disappear), and a man who looks at your boobs while you're trying to make eye contact with him. I respect men, but was never taught I can't look at their butts.

Perhaps desynsetizing would be an equally good approach. Teaching them that yes, women have boobs and men don't. And then it's not such a big deal. And they learn respect along the way. And then when they're grown, there's never been a stigma around boobs. And they can just be normal guys who respect women, like most normal guys do.

Its so amazing to read about everyone and how different we all are. For me, I grew up in church and had beliefs and my parents also taught me values, etc. One of those was sex before marriage. They never shoved it down are throat about it being bad, against religion, but they did share with us that GOD didnt approve of it. Now I never had to worry about it in highschool or anything, but I also didnt talk about it with my parents, which I defintily will do different with my kids one day. I felt very strongly about waiting till I was married, but It didnt happen. I fell in love with someone and we decided to share that with one another. We did part our seperate ways at one point and we moved on with our lives. I did have one other partner whom I dated, and I dont feel bad about sharing that with either people. I feel its all a personal decision and if it is something you want to do, than so be it. Amazingly enough me and my first love are back together and planning our future. Its wierd how the world turns, but its the way life is.

Wow, and Im not the most educated when it comes to sex, so I did also learn some new words form Wheetsin! LOL.

Noone should ever be judged for thier opinions, that is why its called opinioin...

Im jumping around here, but IMO being ...hmm its hard to say what makes you a virgin or not, I mean I know medically you would have to have penetration, but I guess if you are doing other things..mmm...I dont know I would considere a "virgin", but thats me...

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!

Who on here said that sex is fine whenever, with whoever, for whatever reason? Someone who would say that may have a bit of an issue.

Obviously there are people who have sexual problems that may stem from an abusive childhood for example, or people who are sex addicts and the like. But when discussing normal healthy people, it is clear to see that religion does more harm than good in making (normal) people feel bad and guilty about normal sexual behavior. Such as when two people in a relationship have sex and then feel guilty about it purely because they are not married.

And quite frankly, the people I hear about who have the most sexual problems and issues (such as sex addiction, porn addiction, etc.) ARE the religious people! What does that tell us??? Maybe all the repression is not normal and it causes normal sexuality to become skewed.

It is normal for boys to look at breasts. Totally and completely natural and normal. It is normal for people to watch porn. I was exposed to porn when I was young (I saw it on a friend's parent's tv), and I am just fine, thanks. Yes, I was curious about it, enjoyed it even. However it did not turn me into a porn addict, not at all! Now, of course I am NOT (I repeat NOT) advocating that children should be exposed to porn or be encouraged to look at sexual images, but if it happens, it's actually just a normal part of growing up and it's really not the end of the world.

Personally, I think a virgin is anyone that hasn't done anything they could catch an STD from.

Personally, I think a virgin is anyone that hasn't done anything they could catch an STD from.

Thats a great definition.!

You've all heard the saying "It's better to have loved and lossed than never to have loved at all.

As young man in University my male freinds and I made our own version of the saying

"It's better to have failed your Wasserman than never to have loved at all"

Wassermann, Definition - a blood test to detect syphilis

So I guess I would agree with your premise Laurend although I think you may be inadvertantly implying that having sex with someone whom you know does not have an STD allows you to claim virginity

I work with teenagers .The girls call themselves virgins because they don’t have vaginal sex.. only anal, or oral (Clinton comes to mind lol).

And I know people who call themselves virgins because they never had sex (intercourse) before, but their behavior and language are extremely sexual.

My particular feeling: There are people who never had sex before but have the darkest souls. And people who after sex are still clean and pure at heart and mind.

The “first” time is the time you do it out of love..not curiosity or horniness

I work with teenagers .The girls call themselves virgins because they don’t have vaginal sex.. only anal, or oral (Clinton comes to mind lol).

And I know people who call themselves virgins because they never had sex (intercourse) before, but their behavior and language are extremely sexual.

My particular feeling: There are people who never had sex before but have the darkest souls. And people who after sex are still clean and pure at heart and mind.

The “first” time is the time you do it out of love..not curiosity or horniness

This is a very interesting point. I have both read about this and I have been told by friends who belong to more sexually repressive cultures that their youthful sexual activities would involve everything and anything, including anal sex, that would avoid piercing the hymen.

And there are plastic surgeons who make a good living rebuilding hymens for those young women who need them.

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 know this question isnt directed at me, and I dont wish to cause debate on this particular topic, but it does disturb me so much that I spoke pretty strongly on it.

I wouldnt teach a 10 year old ANYTHING about that. But then I dont see admiring a woman's body as somethng that they need to be taught not to do.

Slavering, drooling, being rude or obvious, yes, but simply looking and admiring?. Nothing wrong with that. Although I'd have a fit if my 11 year old had thoughts like that in his head yet. There's no way they'd get there unless I put them there.

I guess I felt so strongly about it because I dont see that as teaching a boy to respect women, I see it as entirely inappropriate and a little "off". Respecting women isnt about not looking at their boobs and its not even about holding doors open and stuff like that. I think respecting women is about getting up in the middle of the night for moral support because the baby is screaming and she's the one who has the boobs that the baby wants. Its about mopping the floor and helping with the housework and truly putting in half the work with the kids. Not about never noticing another pair of boobs ever in your life once you're committed to someone.

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.

I suspect that this method can lead to an unhealthy Puritanism and a neurotic relationship to the body, including one's own. How can it not? How can receiving these admonishments not to look not lumber the 10 year old kid with a sense of ambivalence and shame about all bodies, including his own? How is this kid going to deal with a female body when it is finally okay to look after being trained for years that it is not okay?

I remember when I was a young adolescent girl visiting the Art Gallery of Ontario with my parents and feeling horribly embarrassed by the sight of all those 17th and 18th century nudes. Because my parents liked art I spent any number of times fidgetting, blushing, and staring at my feet. I really thought that it was improper to look at the naked people.

The European attitude towards the body is quite different from ours. Their beaches are topless and some of them permit total nudity. This was a big shock to me initially when I first started living there but it certainly does demystify the human body. And any child who is raised in that environment is aware that the naked body does not come in one format - that of forbidden sex fantasy.

I am amazed at how everyone is jumping to the conclusion that my friend's dear, dear 10YO boy doesn't respect women because he doesn't ogle them. This boy is incredibly kind and respectful, and his mother is not teaching him that the human body is dirty or sinful. She is teaching him that it is not for public consumption. AND she is teaching him to respect not only women, but all human beings of all sizes, shapes, and shades.

When my kids were young, I taught them to wash their hands after going to the bathroom. I didn't explain why; I just taught them to do it. When they were old enough to understand germs I explained that part to them. This is a similar situation. Don't ogle women with their body parts exposed. Develop the habit. One day you'll understand why. The habit is not the extent of his education; it is one facet of it.

My daughters were inadvertently exposed to pornography a few months back. They were in a store with us and the shopkeeper asked my husband to go to the back room with him to pay the bill (he needed a calculator that he didn't have up front). The girls went with him and came back and reported that there was a picture of a woman on the wall with her top lifted up and her breasts showing. They were very confused and didn't understand why a woman would do that and why the man would have the picture on his wall. We took them aside and talked to them about how sad that woman must be to feel like she needs to do that to make money and how she must not respect herself very much. We didn't explain sex to them or go into the intricacies of the pornography industry -- there was no need to. BTW, I didn't think for one minute that my husband had done anything more than notice the porn on the wall and then look away and get to the task at hand.

I remember when I was a young adolescent girl visiting the Art Gallery of Ontario with my parents and feeling horribly embarrassed by the sight of all those 17th and 18th century nudes. Because my parents liked art I spent any number of times fidgetting, blushing, and staring at my feet. I really thought that it was improper to look at the naked people.

If your parents didn't have a problem with it and didn't teach you to have a problem with it, why were you horribly embarrassed?

Someone brought up the point about Europe being more permissive of nudity than the US. I think it's very, very interesting to point out that the more permissive the society, the lower the rates of teenage sexual activity, teenage pregnancy, abortion, and rape are.

The more restrictive the society, the higher the rates of violent sexual crimes are.

Just talk to anyone who comes from the highly religious and restrictive "third world" about their rates of child molestation for example!

As natural, normal views of sexuality increase, sex crimes go down. As restrictive, religious, and antiquated views increase, sex crimes go up, way up.

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!

Who on here said that sex is fine whenever, with whoever, for whatever reason? Someone who would say that may have a bit of an issue.

Why does the "whenever, whoever, whatever" person have an issue? What's the problem with that philosophy? Sex is fun, it doesn't need to be confined to marriage, and there's nothing wrong with multiple partners . . . at least that's what most people here are saying . . . what am I missing?