Bring Disgrace Upon The Virgin Rose

[Stella_Omega]

I just wanted to share this example of compassionate and clear thinking-- From tumblr;

Pro-Abstinence Sex Ed

A male presenter came up and started talking about how virginity was a beautiful gift and should be treasured. He showed a rose to the class and asked who wanted the flower. Everyone raised their hands. He plucked a petal off and asked how many people would still want the flower. Most people raised their hands. He asked someone to pull a petal off and repeated the question. This continued until the flower was bare. He said “Don’t you see that the flower isn’t as valuable because it’s been touched by so many people? How many of you would still want the flower?”

One guy raised his hand up and shouted out:

“I would. It doesn’t matter who touched the flower before I did. If you think that, you are a moron. And your metaphor is sexist.”

To this day, I don’t know who that guy was, but he’s still my hero.

http://lackingcredentials.tumblr.com/post/32284297379/pro-abstinence-sex-ed

Thoughts?

 

[TE999]

I just wanted to share this example of compassionate and clear thinking-- From tumblr;

http://lackingcredentials.tumblr.com/post/32284297379/pro-abstinence-sex-ed

Thoughts?

What a tool (the first dude I mean). Now I know where the term 'deflower (ed) (ing)' originated.

Seriously, what century is this dude from? I spoze in his little corner of the world women are either sluts or virgins. It's hard to comprehend that in these days and times people living in a (presumably) civilized society would still engage in such antediluvian thinking.

Come to think of it, throwbacks like this are against Gay marriage, erotica, nudity and fluoride in their drinking water.

 

[Stella_Omega]

What a tool (the first dude I mean). Now I know where the term 'deflower (ed) (ing)' originated.

also "tearing off a piece" I bet. Seems like "touching" a flower means tearing off all of its petals to this dude.

Seriously, what century is this dude from? I spoze in his little corner of the world women are either sluts or virgins. It's hard to comprehend that in these days and times people living in a (presumably) civilized society would still engage in such antediluvian thinking.

Come to think of it, throwbacks like this are against Gay marriage, erotica, nudity and fluoride in their drinking water.

I am so happy though, that the young guy could understand that the premise was wrong and say so.

I sometimes get sucked into trying to respect an argument that warrants none-- this guy is an inspiration to me.

 

[TE999]

also "tearing off a piece" I bet. Seems like "touching" a flower means tearing off all of its petals to this dude. I am so happy though, that the young guy could understand that the premise was wrong and say so.

I sometimes get sucked into trying to respect an argument that warrants none-- this guy is an inspiration to me.

As indeed he should be to all rational individuals. There is entirely too much of emotion driven reactions to issues nowdays. Rational and coherent thought is quite often trampled by religious dogma and specious reasoning.

 

[3113]

Well, this explains why girls in school keep getting called sluts if this is what they're teaching them.

So how does this "teacher" explain how the rose remains a rose if the one married to the rose has sex and sex and sex with it? If, that is, sex with the rose = removal of a petal?

 

[Stella_Omega]

Well, this explains why girls in school keep getting called sluts if this is what they're teaching them.

So how does this "teacher" explain how the rose remains a rose if the one married to the rose has sex and sex and sex with it? If, that is, sex with the rose = removal of a petal?

We've seen that question answered time and again.

Fucking fuckers.

 

[sun_sea_sky]

I agree the metaphor is stupid. For one thing, having sex does not diminish your capacity to have more sex in the future. Unlike pulling petals off a flower.

Second, taken to its logical extension, you would also not want your girlfriend to have eaten with any other man, or gone to the movies with anyone else, or talked to anyone else.

Third, the idea that the very first person you have sex with will turn out to be the one you are compatible with, is rather naively hopeful.

The whole thing seems to stem from the idea that women (men seem to be exempt) should keep the "gift" of virginity for their wedding night. But how is a man to appreciate this "gift" is he is equally inexperienced? So the man is encouraged to be experienced, in order to appreciate the gift, which itself is hypocritical.

The whole idea of women staying a virgin is based around the rather repugnant notion that a daughter is "given away" by her father to her husband, on the wedding day, "undamaged". In other words, a transfer of property. I had kind-of hoped that attitude had gone away over the last 2000 years.

 

[Boxlicker101]

I agree the metaphor is stupid. For one thing, having sex does not diminish your capacity to have more sex in the future. Unlike pulling petals off a flower.

Second, taken to its logical extension, you would also not want your girlfriend to have eaten with any other man, or gone to the movies with anyone else, or talked to anyone else.

Third, the idea that the very first person you have sex with will turn out to be the one you are compatible with, is rather naively hopeful.

The whole thing seems to stem from the idea that women (men seem to be exempt) should keep the "gift" of virginity for their wedding night. But how is a man to appreciate this "gift" is he is equally inexperienced? So the man is encouraged to be experienced, in order to appreciate the gift, which itself is hypocritical.

The whole idea of women staying a virgin is based around the rather repugnant notion that a daughter is "given away" by her father to her husband, on the wedding day, "undamaged". In other words, a transfer of property. I had kind-of hoped that attitude had gone away over the last 2000 years.

I can't say for sure, but I think the presenter, who is a crackpot, also included boys and men in his simile. Of course, most of them have sense enough to ignore him, and he knows, so he tries to persuade the girls instead. At one time, some of them would have fallen for his line, but I think most females now have sense enough to reject him just as their male counterparts do.

Personally, I would not have wanted to marry a virgin, especially if that meant she had rebuffed me also, and this was in the Fifties. As far as I was concerned, any girl or woman who had so little interest in sex as to not even try it was not somebody I wanted to marry anyhow.

 

[sun_sea_sky]

Yes, there have been reports of people who waited until they got married, only to find that their bride (or groom maybe) actually had no interest in sex at all. Oops.

 

[Bramblethorn]

I just wanted to share this example of compassionate and clear thinking-- From tumblr;

http://lackingcredentials.tumblr.com/post/32284297379/pro-abstinence-sex-ed

Thoughts?

This gives me a happy feeling.

 

[Handley_Page]

I'm tempted to ask in which century this event was done, but from the strange tales I hear or see on Lit, I guess it could be some obscure corner of the 'States. Truth to tell, it was still a prevalent attitude in the 1950s in the UK, although by a rapidly diminishing number of citizenry (most were still scarred by the War).

Come to think of it, there's a good plot bunny in there somewhere.

 

[ishtat]

Just want to observe that the sole purpose of a flower, is to have sex - as often as possible.

 

[emap]

There are still huge expanses of the states where abstinence before marriage is still the lesson. They tell you how it works then say, now save it for the wedding night. Course this is to the daughters, the men are told how it works and to use a condom until married.

At least they are saying use protection. However they are still ignoring the simple fact that premarital sex is a sin and nobody is supposed to, but the guys are told to.

Granted the using a condom part is not always mentioned, depends on if the area is mostly catholic or not.

 

[3113]

Of course, the biggest irony is they don't want the kids to masturbate either. It's one thing to play on men's territorial feelings and desire to "own" their woman (i.e. say he's not going to want her if she's had a lot of other guys before him), but do they really think any man is going to be equally turned off (think the petals gone) if a woman talks about how many times she's touched herself?

 

[MatthewVett]

The best rebuttal I've heard is that even if you want a virgin, your spouse will only be a virgin once. For the next fifty or so years, she's not a virgin. How important can virginity be, then, unless you're only planning on fucking once and then quitting? Insisting on a virgin wife has always seemed so possessive to me.

 

[PennLady]

The best rebuttal I've heard is that even if you want a virgin, your spouse will only be a virgin once. For the next fifty or so years, she's not a virgin. How important can virginity be, then, unless you're only planning on fucking once and then quitting? Insisting on a virgin wife has always seemed so possessive to me.

Maybe that's the point, the possessiveness. I can't tell you how many romances I read where the woman reveals herself to be a virgin -- even in contemporary romances -- and the guy gets even more aroused, and possessive of the woman, at the thought that he will be the only lover the woman knows (b/c naturally at the end they will marry, etc.).

 

[sr71plt]

Just want to observe that the sole purpose of a flower, is to have sex - as often as possible.

Great observation.

 

[Stella_Omega]

A friend of mine sent me this comment;

Wonder what the presenter would say of one did the same sort of thing with a banana, peeling it, and then chomping off one bite after the other until nothing was left?

 

[emap]

There's no proof of it anywhere in any writings, but I'm pretty sure women are supposed to be virgins on their wedding night so she won't know if he sucks at sex or not.

I mean come on, guys are fixated on how big their dick is, a guy who is slightly above average wants to get surgery to get bigger. They don't think of anything but sex, and yet, so many seem to be so incredibly bad at sex and don't listen. I mean all the complaints can't be wrong and I remember having bad lovers.

There is plenty of evidence of this point however, roughly 60% of our parents, grandparents, and so forth, got married fast because there is a pregnancy. Shotgun weddings are the more obvious signs of that. Nobody admits it but the whole not before married crap isn't listened to by most.

 

[TxRad]

There's no proof of it anywhere in any writings, but I'm pretty sure women are supposed to be virgins on their wedding night so she won't know if he sucks at sex or not.

I mean come on, guys are fixated on how big their dick is, a guy who is slightly above average wants to get surgery to get bigger. They don't think of anything but sex, and yet, so many seem to be so incredibly bad at sex and don't listen. I mean all the complaints can't be wrong and I remember having bad lovers.

There is plenty of evidence of this point however, roughly 60% of our parents, grandparents, and so forth, got married fast because there is a pregnancy. Shotgun weddings are the more obvious signs of that. Nobody admits it but the whole not before married crap isn't listened to by most.

A formal wedding would be white shotguns, right?

I keep wondering how the guy giving that talk could actually keep a straight face. I would have been busting out laughing just listening to him.

 

[Handley_Page]

Do we know who the idiot present was/ is ?

 

[sun_sea_sky]

There are still huge expanses of the states where abstinence before marriage is still the lesson. They tell you how it works then say, now save it for the wedding night.

There is considerable doubt as to whether preaching abstinence achieves anything at all, or at the most, only a brief delay in the onset of pre-marital sex:

http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/publications/409?task=view

Plus I think it is pretty-well established that by not teaching contraception (so kids don't "get ideas") you merely increase the pregnancy rate, not reduce it.

 

[Stella_Omega]

There is considerable doubt as to whether preaching abstinence achieves anything at all, or at the most, only a brief delay in the onset of pre-marital sex:

http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/publications/409?task=view

Plus I think it is pretty-well established that by not teaching contraception (so kids don't "get ideas") you merely increase the pregnancy rate, not reduce it.

And yet people still draw paychecks for telling kids this kind of crap.

 

[emap]

Sun there's no doubt about it, preaching abstinence doesn't do a fucking thing but make them try out sex faster. Forbidden fruit except it's not really forbidden and it's only a couple prayers, but it's still bad to do it.

Teenagers live to do the exact opposite of what their parents say. If they actually wanted their kids to not have sex the best method is probably encourage them to do it. I mean talk about the hot guy or girl and how their kid should go over to them and talk them up, mention how hot they are and ask if they want to go someplace private. I'd probably still be a virgin if my parents did that to me.

 

[nicecthulhu]

There's no proof of it anywhere in any writings, but I'm pretty sure women are supposed to be virgins on their wedding night so she won't know if he sucks at sex or not.

Women are supposed to be virgins on their wedding night so that the groom and his family have no doubt who fathers the children. While some men may be lousy in bed, some women are too. But I think this whole thing dates back to a time when western society frowned on sex for fun.

I mean come on, guys are fixated on how big their dick is, a guy who is slightly above average wants to get surgery to get bigger. They don't think of anything but sex, and yet, so many seem to be so incredibly bad at sex and don't listen. I mean all the complaints can't be wrong and I remember having bad lovers.

Both men and women can be fixated on size or looks or what have you and forget that the most important things are communication, enthusiasm and, as you say, listening.

There is plenty of evidence of this point however, roughly 60% of our parents, grandparents, and so forth, got married fast because there is a pregnancy. Shotgun weddings are the more obvious signs of that. Nobody admits it but the whole not before married crap isn't listened to by most.

I wonder if that 60% stat is too low in some areas. I heard an anecdote that the waist on women's wedding dresses was higher than normal in case she suddenly gained weight around the uterus. You know, from all the food at the picnics her and her beau were disappearing off to... Oh, and six months later she had an eight pound preemie.

Abstinence in itself isn't bad, if it's taught with the other common options. In other words, "it's better if you wait but if it's going to happen make sure the girl's on the pill and you've got some condoms".
Teaching abstinence only is terrible, and teaching nothing is worse.
Part of the problem is the guy can easily walk away from a pregnant girlfriend, while the pregnant girlfriend can easily be stigmatized and isolated, even in our supposedly advanced western culture.

But it looks like everyone here seems to have a fairly rational view on this.