This is a comment by Danny on the post “Can’t Get Laid“.
“I think a great start would be to stop treating female virginity like its a treasure that must be guarded until marriage and male virginity like is a curse that must be dispelled as soon as possible (and when you think it about in terms of heterosexual sex these two almost contradict each other).
“But in order for that to change it would call for changing the way sex is regarded at some pretty fundamental ways. Look at the stories that pop up over parents being mad because of what a sex teacher said in class. Look at how people reach for religious texts to back up their beliefs on sex. Those are base level things that have to be changed (or at least no longer be allowed to have a controlling influence on the conversation).
“I think that making the world a more sex friendly place would help a lot. In terms of heterosexual sex it would free up women to pursue the sex they want and it would free up men to not be expected, nigh demanded, to pursue sex. (I think you might see a change where the number of women pursuing sex increases and the number of men perusing sex decreases, in terms of heterosexuality at least, closer to even numbers maybe?). And of course in a more sex friendly world people would be free to pursue whatever sex they are into without being beat over the head with presumptions and demands of heterosexuality and male/female gender identity.”
More Comments of the Day
Photo credit: Flickr / jenny8lee
About the Editors
As a female virgin I would like to say my choice has absolutely nothing to do with religion and wish men would stop assuming I’m waiting for love and marriage. I’m just waiting for a man I trust and am attracted to. I’ve yet to find both in the same package.
Precisely. The fact that you are a virgin shouldn’t have any bearing on what kind of woman you are and most certainly why you are still a virgin shouldn’t have any bearing on what kid of woman you are.
Danny:
“We need to stop treating female virginity like a treasure and male virginity like a curse.”
The Gretchen question is: Do you think people should respect other people sexual identities (as long as they respect everyones bodily autonomy, are reasonably safe and do not involve cheating)?
If you say no, you will have a hard time telling why your ideas about sex are better then somebody else’s.
If you say yes, you can not say what the world of sex shall look like (other then everybody is free to pursue the sex they want). You could end up in a world, where many heterosexual men see women who had many sexual partners as less desirable and women see men whose number of partners is very low as less desirable. They do not have to see them as bad or damaged to see them as less desirable. In such a world casual sex would have additional costs for women and men would be inclined to pursue sex, just to have had sex.
Do you think people should respect other people sexual identities (as long as they respect everyones bodily autonomy, are reasonably safe and do not involve cheating)?
I’d say yes.
You could end up in a world, where many heterosexual men see women who had many sexual partners as less desirable and women see men whose number of partners is very low as less desirable.
Possibly. But I think the mentality would change from objectively declaring, “That person is bad because of their sexual history” to deciding for themselves subjectively (I hope I got those right) “That person is bad because of their sexual history.”
The former seems to draw definite conclusions in areas that aren’t even limited to sex (for instance is the fact that a man is still a virgin until his 30s really a sign that he is “a bad lover” (and I don’t just mean sex I’m talking the whole package) or the fact that a woman has had 30 sex partners before 40 really a sign that she doesn’t respect her body?) while the latter at least allows room for consideration of such conclusions MIGHT be true.
For example if I were to meet a woman that had had 30 sex partners before 40 it would be one thing for me to decide not to be sexually active with her on the grounds that it MIGHT NOT be safe (and allowing for room for the possibility that I might be wrong) but it’s quite another to presume that she is full of every STI imaginable just because she has a high number of partners (and refusing to believe any possibility that she could be practicing safe sex the whole way).
In such a world casual sex would have additional costs for women and men would be inclined to pursue sex, just to have had sex.
Out of curiosity what would those costs be?
Danny:
“Out of curiosity what would those costs be?”
I was kind of redundant here, the obvious costs of being seen as less desirable by certain men, and hence limiting your mating opportunities.
In general we are trying here to distinguish between the moral value of a person (for which we do not want the sexual history of said person be of any relevance) and the value as a sexual partner (which is subjective and for which people will be discriminating and taking the sexual history into account). The problem is your value as a human being ( at least, as you perceive it) depends on the acceptance of you, as whole person, by others. If people hold you in high regard, but disregard your ability to contribute to society by working outside of the household or charity, you are not accepted as a whole person. Same when people value you as a friend and for your skills, but nobody desires you sexually, you are not fully accepted, because your sexuality is an integral part of your personality (for most people).
And I believe that those moral rules for sexual behaviour ẃere not implemented to oppress people but to give people guidance for smart decisions and to make society function and avoid conflict.
This doesn’t mean we have to uphold those moral rules, but think critically about human sexuality and the traps one might fall into by acting without caution.
Being a “bad lover” was not usually what I would worry about when it came to a man with a limited sexual history. The main thing that would get into my head about a man with a low partner count would be that he hasn’t “gotten it out of his system.” Thus, he’d be more likely to cheat given the opportunity…and more likely to be bitter about being “chained down” to one woman. I dated a man who didn’t get much sexual attention early on and then started getting a bunch due to some weight loss, resulting in a confidence boost. He got such a high from female attention that he didn’t get in high school that he chased it relentlessly, no matter who it hurt or humiliated. Eventually, he got very tired of it. I was a nerd myself and acted similarly for a while when I ‘got hot’ and started receiving tons of sexual attention. As I got more partners, I became LESS interested in casual sex. The novelty and thrill of being desired and new bodies wore off, and I started to understand what I really wanted and what I didn’t want.
Going back to the bad lover thing, though. If anything, I would worry that a man who was a virgin or had few sexual encounters might have spent too much time with porn and can’t get off/get hard with a real woman or takes sexual lessons from it. You *do* hear these types of horror stories. Obviously it’s not every man, but it is something that crosses my mind. It’s not that I’d be trying to shame him, but if he spent 10 years only jacking off to porn, would I ever be able to measure up to the production values, the variety, and the grip of his own hand? Does he understand that real sex can be many different things? Will he try too hard to show off instead of enjoying himself? We really do have to get away from these thoughts and stereotypes.
This isn’t the first time I made this sort of comment about virginity.
http://dannyscorneroftheuniverse.blogspot.com/2010/05/being-guy-and-being-virgin-1.html