h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

*not trying to start an arguement*

I wouldn't really want to marry a girl who has been with a couple of other guys before, and on the flips side, I would want to save myself for her.

peace.

Yeah I can kind of see that. Its not an uncommon view. You really don't want to be thinking about your GFs previous men, unless of course she says that you are the best. But of course she could be saying that to all of you one after another

This then kind of reminds me about all the surveys done about sex and when people do it and how much etc. In all of them men claim to have had more partners, started at an earlier age, have sex more often than women. This leads me to the inevitable conclusion that:

1) someone is lying. Or,
2) there are some really dirty girls out there who never get interviewed by market researchers.

Sir T, I admire your stance. I really hope it works out that way for you.

Peace to you too.

GreyDesk, why is someone dirty just because they enjoy sex

religion - christian (methodist)

married (after having lived together) with 1 child

I don't really know what the methodist views are but my personal views are as follows:

Sex before marriage is o.k., in fact with the rising cost of divorces, I would say, don't bother getting married at all. Also you seem to forget about people who can't legally get married (I won't go into details but I live in Brighton and hence am very liberally minded)

Sex outside of a monogamous (nearly said monotonous - oops!) relationship is more of a tricky point. I'd be a hypocrite if I said that people should be in secure monogamous relationships before they even think about having sex. I'm sure we've all made 'mistakes' at some point.

If you're happy with what you're doing and you're not hurting anyone, who cares what anyone else thinks.

Religion - recently coverted Wiccan (from agnosticism)

Age - 19

Sex before marriage - absolutely. There's no reason why not - the important thing is that sex, being the method by which children are produced, is treated with respect by all involved. I don't think it should be done casually - there should definitely be a prior commitment and dedication on behalf of the couple involved. However, requiring marriage is just silly really. What if your partner is awful in bed and makes you feel nauseous? Best to find out before you've promised to dedicate your life to them, hmm?

This is one of the reasons why Pagan Handfasting ceremonies usually happen twice - the first one allows two people to commit to each other, but after a year it can be nullified if they turn out not to get along. If they do get along, however, they can do the whole thing again but make it an eternal pledge. I really rather like that idea. What better way to celebrate your first year of blissful marriage than to reaffirm your commitment to your partner?

I'm drifting off the topic though. Sex before marriage is fine in my book - but casual sex isn't. I mean, what else is marriage than a public declaration of commitment to each other?

Religion: Agnostic (with strong Pagan leanings)
Sex Before Marriage: Yes... with the following provisos:
Sex Before developing a secure emotional tie to the partner: No.
Sex with someone you have dated a couple of time: Definitely Not!

One of the tenants of Paganism I subscribe to is to do no harm to others... this includes ensuring that you are healthy (ie not infected with an STD) before starting a sexual relationship.

Another tenant is to respect the wishes and feelings of others... so engaging in a sexual relationship before either or both partners are ready would also be a no-no. Sex is a equal union between two people, and that union should be viewed as sacred and meaningful.

I think is important to wait for the right person >and< the right time before indulging in sex.

B.

It may be a bit geeky to ask, but there you have it:
How, exactly, do you define sex? Is it just intercourse? I once witnessed a discussion on TV where it was stated that in some cultures, anal sex before marriage is accepted, as the woman remains, technically, a virgo intacta. So then, where do you draw the line between, say, holding hands, kissing, petting, sensual breathing, common masturbation, oral sex, intercourse... you name it.

As for me:
Religion - agnostic
Sex before marriage - I am ok with it an do enjoy it ('sex' here including all of the above; well, almost all). If it feels right for all concerned, I'd say go for it.
Sex after marriage - Now I hear that this can become an issue...

FABT hit most of the nails on the head for me.

Religion - raised in a surprisingly unorthodox CofE vicarage - now a non-practicing secular Buddhist.



There are so many kinds of sex; one of my friends asked me once recently whether I ever referred to sex as 'making love' to which I replied 'of course I do, if it IS making love'. Sometimes it is, sometimes it isn't.

Sex is about more than just physical pleasure. It can also be about taking you into places and spaces that you cannot get to any other way. You may be doing that as a shared journey, or it may be more about your own head-spaces than about you-and-whoever-you-are-doing-it-with. Sex can be about power-trips. It can be about transactions: I can understand that paying for sex could be an erotic thrill in itself. And as Kaz has noted, in non-monotheistic traditions sex is also about agricultural fertility, economic continutity and magic.

It is tricky, potent and dangerous stuff.



Marriage is also about all sorts of different things. There is the romantic myth of the soul-mate; there is the economic unit; there is the genetic and evolutionary imperative; there are seating arrangements at dinner parties.



I find it interesting that no-one has mentioned raising children in this context. I am not talking about passing your mores onto them; I am talking about the statistical fact that boys who have a (good) male parental role model are more stable, better socialised, and less likely to commit crimes. A stable marriage - either sanctified by a religious ceremony or confirmed by long-term commitment in common law - is the best place to raise children. An abusive marriage is one of the worst, however.



I was married for a long time, and faithful without any effort within that marriage. I was not a virgin before I married, the stakes would have been too high. There is something extremely potent and sexy about long-term sexual fidelity. But it is not the only sexy form of sex.

I don't expect to marry again; for me marriage is like losing one's virginity - it is something you can only do once. I have more respect than I can say for people who are supportively and lovingly married for 40, 50 or 60 years. As I say, I do not expect to marry again, but I may meet someone who changes my mind on that one. Who knows.



To summarise: I think that sex is about a lot of different things, some of which include fidelity and intimacy; and that marriage is about a lot of things, some of which include love and mutual support. But that ultimately they are not about enough of the same things for it to be possible or even wise to decree that sex should only take place within a marriage.



Finally I have come to the conclusion that a lot of things that sound like decrees are actually obervations. For example, it is observable that people who have a high degree of spirituality tend not to be that materialistic. (Include me out, on both counts, btw). But there has been a tendency to flip around the cause and effect and assume that a lack of material things will bring about spiritual worth. So the Catholic tradition forced a large number of boys and girls into monastries and convents on the assumption that they would thereby become holier men and women.

My guess is that it is observable that people in a relationship which is based on love, mutual respect and sexual compatability will tend not to seek sexual encounters outside that relationship. But somewhere along the line cause and effect got flipped over.



That looks a little longer than two cents worth. More like a couple of bob, maybe.

Ben

PS - one final thing. I have come across situations where infidelity destroys marriages, and I have come across situations where infidelity does not destroy the marriage, instead it strengthens it. It depends - again - on the headspace of the individuals concerned. However, I do not advocate infidelity; I just observe.

Religion: In summary, Agnostic, in reality, Pick-n-mix ... those bits I like and agree with I stick by, hence there's quite a strong Buddhist leaning.

Sex Before Marriage?

The idea of saving yourself for the one true love is without doubt an amazing thing and I admire anyone who can genuinely do it.
Three friends of mine have all trodden that route. One was a strict catholic (female) who had friends who refused to use tampons as they believed they would effectively take their virginity, the other, a guy, got engaged aged 20 as a commitment thing but still stuck with the no sex before marriage rule but had to marry a little earlier than intended as his future Mrs got pregnant, and the third, as far as I am aware is still treading that path. As I said, anyone who believes in no sex before marriage and abides by it, I take my hat off. I'm not easily swayed but when it came to sex, peer pressure was remarkably persuasive ...

Much like Abi, I regret the way in which I lost my virginity but then you can't exactly ask to have it back! You live and learn.

Sex within a strong relationship, whether official in the sight of god or a first class ticket to eternal damnation is a wonderful thing. Mutual trust and respect is the most important thing. I've had drunken one night stands where I've barely remembered the girls name, but then again I've had short (2 weeks), medium and long (3 1/2 years) term relationships all of which have their merits. The long term was undoubtedly the most fantastic but then when you're with someone for any length of time the trust thing takes you to whole new levels, especially with regard to spontinaeity (sp?).

I don't know whether this says anything or not ... just kind of openend the sluices and let it flow ...

In summary, I believe that sex before marriage isn't necessarily right, but then neither is it wrong. If anyone has read Birdsong by Sebastian Faulks the first part when Stephen Wraysford has his affair with his benefactors wife is, I believe, incredibly poignant ... she is young when she marries a much older man who uses her for sex in an animalistic way. Along comes young Mr Wraysford and shows her what it can be like.

I can't imagine how disappointing it would be (in someways I wish I could) if you'd heard all about how wonderful sex was having saved yourself for the one true love and then find that it isn't pleasurable at all. I guess you wouldn't be any the wiser without a measuring stick but then the world is full of measuring sticks ...

So no sex before marriage, but he had to marry early because she became pregnant? How did that happen?

That was kind of the point ... they had, I suppose, at least committed themselves to one another in getting engaged and it was only the formalities of the "I do's" ...

I remember reading somewhere quite recently about the current fad for US (and possibly those of other nations) to pledge that they will remain virgins until marriage, taken in front of family and friends.

They did a survey of all those who had made such a pledge and for some incredible percentage, vaginal intercourse was the only variant of sex they hadn't tried, so I guess they were technically virgins. Everything else that could be done, had been done, and I mean everything.

I blame Clinton.

But people can also stop being engaged pretty easily. So not that much of a commitment.

Religion: Christian, CofE I guess

Take on this subject:
Its a matter of conscience. Whenever you do decide to have sex you have to appreciate that with the best will and contraception in the world a li'l baby may result nonetheless - If it didn't, I wouldn't be sitting here posting this because my parents never married. I don't believe, however, that by concieving me my parents bought themselves a one-way ticket to hell, no matter how that bloke at www.jesusis.net decides to interpret the Bible.

I would rather have sex within marriage because of the commitment, because of the possibilty of children and the best framework for bringing them up (assuming I choose the right guy ) and because of the lessened opportunity for major hurt (again assuming I choose the right guy)

I was taught this position when I was young. But I don't believe in it "just because the Bible says so"; I realise the example I'm about to quote is from the Old Testament so not necessarily directly applicable to Christians, but who doesn't mix the types of fabric they wear? It says you must only where one kind at a time in Leviticus (I think, might be any others of the first five, though).

I know most people here are taking this into consideration but for those that havent yet.....we are talking about marriage like it is an accepted valid option for eveyone. It is not. due to gender or relgigion or many other reasons. so maybe the question should really have been, do you believe in sex outside a committed relationship.

the answers for pre marrige seem to be almost universlly yes but its personal choice. the answers here for pre a committed relationship are much more evenly split between yes and no.



perhaps we need the further questions do you believe in marriage?, is marriage mainly a religious phenominon? do you believe in committed relationships? do you believe in casual realationships? the problem gets more and more complex.

are h2g2 researchers weird.....or is this the same all over the world

FABT

That's more or less it really. I do believe that marriage is an option for some people, but not for others. My parents seem to be getting along just fine in their marriage, which is great and in this world I'm pretty lucky to have had that kind of stable situation in which to grow up. However, I think it's important for two people find what's right for them and stick to that - they're much more likely to be happy. If it should happen that two people meet and fall in love and live together, but they maybe have occasional dalliances with other partners, then is that intrinsically wrong or is it okay if they're okay with it - provided, of course, that those other partners don't get hurt in the process, which is probably the hardest part to satisfy.

The key thing is, though, that sex should not be had if both partners are not entirely happy with the situation and circumstances in which they are having it.

Religion: Christian - in fact I have been for most of my adult live involved in teaching teenagers and others what the bible says about all sorts of issues includding sex before marriage.

Sex before marriage: Until a few years ago I would have definitively said no, never, no way. And indeed it has come to a shock to many that I am currently having a sexual relationship with my fiancee. It would come as more of a shock if they also knew of the homosexual sexual relationships I have had.

Why did I change my tune? I guess I fell into temptation, however with my current partner it somehow does not feel so much like I'm cheating. After all we knew from very early on that it was meant to be, we consider oursleves to be married as it is. We have enchanged the vows before God just not yet in any legal setting with witnesses. After all the Celtic Church you only had to get married in the presence of a preacher and surely that would count me in!

Any how sex in my current relationship is sex with the last person I will ever have sex with which leads to the sex after marriage.

Sex After marriage: I'm looking forward to this and trust it will be the same as it is at present now that we have settled into a pattenr of not expecting iut everytime we are in bed, depneding on state of tiredness nad health, but it will still be a healthy number of times each week, as for when the kids come along. We hope to be able to maintain a healthy sex life in some form.

It is worth explicitly making a point which has been touched on by others.

Marriage is not an option in most countries for homosexual men or women.

Ben

or for more than two people in a relationship. try getting a justice of the priest to marry a thresom or foursome,......they wont like it!

FABT