Premarital sex-- any logical arguments against it?

[Ezzedean]

The most common shared trait of serial killers is that they kill multiple people...Fact.

I think you'll find there's plenty of people who watch a huge amount of porn and don't then go out and and dismember co-eds as a sideline. Unless you're suggesting that there isn't something already terribly flawed and wrong with people who become serial killers before they started watching porn?

lol I was kind of making a joke... and you're right.. the most common trait serial killers have is that they kill multiple amounts of people... Yes, there are many people who watch a lot of porn who don't go out murdering people....BUT all jokes aside... I didn't just throw out some random statement... it is actually true what I said... many serial killers have been caught having a LARGE collection of pornography... and even in their interogations they will make mention to pornographic movies.... but in the end I was mostly telling a joke. Wasn't intending to start a huge debate on porn man.

Peace

 

[Quoth The Raven]

Oh, and even if this statement were true - it is irrelevant to the point I was making.

Which is what, that people aren't capable of knowing they do or don't want to do something their partner doesn't or does want to do unless it's pointed out to them by a plotless piece of film with naff background music?:sarcastic

 

[Flappycat]

Those who have had premarital sex are more likely to have extramarital affairs as well.

Post hoc ergo propter hoc, then? Both, however, are likely to occur as a result of a higher sex drive, and this is the only likely connection that I can see between the latter and the former. The statistical data may be accurate, but it is completely worthless for our purposes. Also, a person who will not admit to the latter isn't apt to admit to the former, whether having done so or not.

 

[Ðanisty]

My problem with that is, if the only reason a guy is going to 'commit' to me is because I'm witholding sex, then I don't want him anyway. That philosophy reduces sex to a bargaining tool and nothing more. 'Do what I want, or you don't get any.'
People will be interested in commiting to each other or they wont. A commitment based on 'this is the only way I'm gonna get my end in' isn't worth much in my book.

It's kind of self-deprecating if you ask me. It's like believing that the only reason someone would marry you is if you put out. It doesn't say much about a person's self-esteem.

Plus, I've never been able to figure out how comparing yourself to a cow could be considered positive.

 

[Sunstone]

One of the most common traits serial killers have is the massive amount of porn they watch... fact.

Peace

A friend of mine works with the CID (which is the US Army's equivalent of the FBI) and has worked on cases involving serial killers. We were having a conversation about what serial killers had in common once, and he mentioned that one of the things they have in common is religious/sexual abuse. Stuff like being raped in the closet while the Old Testament is read to them.

At some point in our conversation I asked him, "Do all people who have these things in common become serial killers?" He answered "By no means. Many people have every factor in common with serial killers, and yet they do not become serial killers."

 

[SoyLeche]

Which is what, that people aren't capable of knowing they do or don't want to do something their partner doesn't or does want to do unless it's pointed out to them by a plotless piece of film with naff background music?:sarcastic

That people are more likely to find a sexual pattern that satisfies them with their spouse if they don't have clutter from past experience and external stimuli getting in the way.

 

[Quoth The Raven]

It's kind of self-deprecating if you ask me. It's like believing that the only reason someone would marry you is if you put out. It doesn't say much about a person's self-esteem.

Plus, I've never been able to figure out how comparing yourself to a cow could be considered positive.

Funny thing, my other half's granny used to tell him,'Why buy a book when you can go to the library?'
This coming from a woman who married at 16, lost her husband in the war and never looked at another man again til she died at 80 something.

 

[Booko]

My problem with that is, if the only reason a guy is going to 'commit' to me is because I'm witholding sex, then I don't want him anyway. That philosophy reduces sex to a bargaining tool and nothing more. 'Do what I want, or you don't get any.'

Ah, but that's not the only reason. All it is is just one way of telling how serious someone is. If all they're after is a little nookie and they aren't getting any...they'll move along, and then you'll know.

People will be interested in commiting to each other or they wont. A commitment based on 'this is the only way I'm gonna get my end in' isn't worth much in my book.

Do you think that not joining your finances in one checking account before marriage is also "withholding"?

 

[Booko]

Married people do the same thing...they just have to spend more money to leave.

At a much lower rate, as SoyLeche and I have both mentioned.

 

[Ody]

One of the most common traits serial killers have is the massive amount of porn they watch... fact.

Peace

If you think pornography makes serial killers... *sigh*

 

[Inky]

I can understand why it might irk someone. The problem is, if you give the guy the "milk" for free, you don't really know if he'll commit or not, because *he doesn't have to.* I can't tell you how many times a woman told her significant other, "OK, so we've been together 3 years...let's get married, you've had long enough to decide you like this" and a week later, he's moved out.

I can see how that would be frustrating to someone, but I also don't think most women want men to marry them for sex. I would only want to marry someone if they thought me valuable enough to get hitched to even if they didn't get a sexual "bonus" in the bargain. I also don't think most women would consider a longterm relationship a waste just because it didn't last forever. I certainly don't. Also, the theoretical guy who thinks to himself "hmm, if we get married I'll start getting some...I'd better go ring shopping" is definitely a sleaze and getting married for the wrong reason, and I'd rather weed him out of my partner pool.
This whole scenario is very sex-stereotypical, almost sexist (to both sexes). It makes women's sexual side into a commodity--why use your own sexuality in ways that please you when you can use it as a bargaining chip instead, especially if someone would only value a marriage with you if you toss that chip to them? It also assumes that men marry to satisfy sexual urges, and if they were satisfied sexually they'd have no interest in marrying even an intelligent, caring person whom they love. (Let's see how many times Inky can use the word "sex" in three sentences! Whoo...)

No, you misunderstand me entirely. What it means is that a child born out of wedlock is far more likely to be in a position where he/she will be supported by only one parent, not two. And the one parent will be female, and studies continually show women have 75% the earning power of men as well. That's where the poverty comes into the picture.

This is true, but even married couples don't let their sex lives revolve around the small chance that birth control will fail. Mistakes will happen, but that doesn't automatically mean the badness of the mistake outweights the benefits of taking the risk. It's like tree climbing--a certain percentage of people who have ever climbed a tree will crash to the ground and get horribly maimed or die. You have some control over how likely it is, based on how careful you are, but you can't eliminate that last tiny chance that it'll happen anyway. You have to ask yourself "which is more valuable, engaging in the joy and mystery of tree-climbing, or decreasing my risk of falling out of a tree by 0.5%? If I end up in a body cast and unable to work, will my family think I did wrong to take that risk, no matter how unlikely it was?" (And yes, the 0.5% is a random number; it's just for the analogy.)

For anyone having sex who doesn't want children, condoms and the Pill together are highly recommended. According to the FDA at http://www.fda.gov/fdac/features/1997/conceptbl.html, that gives you an 0.7% chance of pregnancy per year if you are as careless as the average person, and an 0.003% chance if you take the pill every day and always use a condom. (Use an IUD instead of the Pill and it's 0.11% and 0.02%, and you don't have to think about medicine every day.) So for people using the Pill and condom, there is an average of 285 years of sexual activity per accidental pregnancy (since two people's sexual activity causes one pregnancy).

Nice rationalization, but the science doesn't back it up. I suggest you speak to an epidemiologist about this, because you're flat out wrong on this one.

I doubt there's a study showing that people in longterm monogamous relationships have an equal likelihood of getting STDs as people with a large number of anonymous partners. That's all I was saying.

It isn't about telling the truth or not telling the truth, because often STDs are spread when the person doesn't even know they have an STD.

And no, you don't have to have oodles of multiple partners for the mathematics to be compelling. Even 3 is sufficient. Clearly the more partners people have on average the faster the spread, but the spread will occur even with minimal partners.

That's what Planned Parenthood or your family doctor is for. It's a very good idea to get tested before entering a sexual relationship even if you're a virgin, since sometimes things come from trying on clothes in a store, borrowing a bathing suit, etc. Tell your partner to get tested, too.

If those living together are really committed as in "for life" as in "married" there won't be multiple partners. (In an ideal world -- yeah, I know there's divorce.) You can't say that about cohabitants, because the research shows they simply aren't as committed as those who bother to get married. They break off and rejoin with other partners throughout their lifetimes at a significantly higher rate than married folks do.

Well, that might be an apples and oranges comparison then, because people didn't really cohibitate then either. There were common law marriages sometimes, but they were "marriages" for real, just without the paper. The participants weren't just kicking the tires and slamming the doors to see how they liked the ride.

I agree about apples and oranges; cohabiting as far as I've seen it is live-in dating, although it implies that they've been together for a while. So, I'd compare all serious dating couples with each other whether or not they live together.

I don't see anything wrong with kicking the tires for a bit, or even joy-riding without being sure you want to buy. Both people just need to understand where the other one's coming from. More soapboxing: If you want to date someone in hopes of marrying them, and would interpret the peacable ending of a close, years-long relationship as a tragedy which blows away all the time and effort you spent, tell them. It could be that they would view that same ending as the wrapping-up of a great adventure between you two, and so they weren't especially planning for it to last forever--even though it might anyway. If the two of you want different things, you may not be right for each other. In the same way, if you are okay with things not lasting until death, tell your partner, so they don't end up disappointed with you and you don't have to deal with the guilt of failing to meet their expectations.

 

[Ðanisty]

At a much lower rate, as SoyLeche and I have both mentioned.

But why at a lower rate? Is it because married people are consistently more committed to each other. My experiences says not. From what I've seen, married people are more likely to stick together for pride and because they feel like they have to.

 

[Inky]

All it is is just one way of telling how serious someone is. If all they're after is a little nookie and they aren't getting any...they'll move along, and then you'll know.

Sure, it'll weed them out, but so will observing how people treat you and deciding for yourself whether they behave respectfully and honorably. That way you don't have to withhold sex from yourself, just from the creeps.

Do you think that not joining your finances in one checking account before marriage is also "withholding"?

Breaking up with someone with whom you share an account is a greater loss than if you didn't share it, because they might steal your money and even if they don't you have to do paperwork. You have to balance this with the convenience of a shared account and decide which is more important. Why is breaking up with someone with whom you've had sex a greater loss than if you hadn't slept with them? You may be more attached to them, but for most people the experience of sex with a loved one far outweighs the risk of missing them more later. If you do the research and get the check-ups, the experience may also mean more than the increased chance of STDs due to having one more sexual partner in your lifetime. There are gains and losses in every decision.

 

[Flappycat]

That people are more likely to find a sexual pattern that satisfies them with their spouse if they don't have clutter from past experience and external stimuli getting in the way.

That hasn't been my experience, though. My partner and I have tended to grow into each other's tastes and interests. It's something we're very open with each other about. "Hey, honey! Look what I found! Doesn't that look fun?" Is this unusual? My parents had a porn stash, too, and their marriage is solid as a rock; they had really bad taste, too! I really think the only things that can actually hurt a strong relationship are secrecy and intolerance. Unless my experiences have been somewhat out of the ordinary.

 

[Quoth The Raven]

Do you think that not joining your finances in one checking account before marriage is also "withholding"?

Some people don't have a joint account even after they marry. My grandparents had seperate bank accounts their entire marriage, and they were married for over 50 years. Would you suggest that shows a lack of commitment?

 

[Ezzedean]

If you think pornography makes serial killers... *sigh*

It was a joke... I thought I cleared that up already.

 

[Ezzedean]

From what I've seen, married people are more likely to stick together for pride and because they feel like they have to.

Good thing I haven't grown up seeing what you've seen... you can't just judge all marriages from the ones you've seen, right?

Peace and Blessings

 

[Ðanisty]

Good thing I haven't grown up seeing what you've seen... you can't just judge all marriages from the ones you've seen, right?

Peace and Blessings

Nope, and neither can you. There are a lot of people out there that stay married for very bad reasons. There are a few people out there that stay married because they're genuinely happy. Incidentally, these aren't things I saw growing up. These are things I've seen in as an adult.

 

[Flappycat]

In my experience, they seem to stay together more out of habit.

 

[Quoth The Raven]

In my experience, they seem to stay together more out of habit.

Some stay together because they're genuinely happy...many people stay together because they aren't unhappy.I've known people who basically couldn't stand the sight of each other - and worked conflicting rosters to avoid each other - who only stayed together because they both refused to be the one to leave and risk maybe losing out financially. One of the reasons my other half stayed with his ex for so long in a marriage that was a train wreck almost from the start, was because he's as pig headed as they come and his family hadn't wanted him to marry her in the first place, so he was determined to prove them wrong. One couple in particular I know of haven't even slept together in the last 12 years, but they still get along alright and they have a child, so their attitude is why disrupt the status quo.
There are a million different reasons why people stay married, and a lot of them aren't good ones.