Depends on the individual. Some people can handle it, others not.
It's also good to lay down the ground rules ahead of time, so you're not leading anyone on and having them hope it was more than it was.
If it's honest and consensual, don't see why it would be wrong.
2007-04-09 06:05:03
·
answer #1
·
answered by Luis 6
·
1⤊
1⤋
Here's some food for thought. Maybe it's different for men, but I think for women, there's an emotional attachment with a person you have sex with. Think of when you have been sexually involved with a person and then broke up, versus a person you never had sex with, did you feel more of a loss in the relationship because you were more involved with them?
The problem really comes in here when a person is only in sex for the recreational aspects and the other puts more significance into it and considers it a sexual RELATIONSHIP (sorry, there is no other way to emphasize certain words). It only stands to hurt the person to whom it had more significance. And you know that people ALWAYS understands the other person's intentions (sarcasm on this sentence)!
In addition, no form of sexual protection is 100% effective. Condoms break. People forget to use birth control properly, and there is always a chance that it can fail. The result is a lot more STDs, abortions, broken hearts, hurt feelings, and unwanted/unplanned pregnancies.
For those reasons, and so many more, I feel that sex should only be reserved for a person with whom you are totally committed to.
2007-04-09 12:47:36
·
answer #2
·
answered by Searcher 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
To be completely honest, this is a personal choice. The individual has to decide their priorities.
Should sex just be for the one you love? Ideally, yes, but not everyone has the fortitude to maintain abstinence while waiting for that special someone.
What a person needs to do is be completely honest with themselves and their needs. Then, if they decide to have non-romantic sexual partners that they make responsible choices about these partners.
Too often we see what's come to be known as "Serial Monogamists." These are people that "fall in love" quickly and commit to a partner then choosing to have unprotected sex. The relationship quickly ends and they move onto the next mate, and the cycle starts all over.
So, good luck and make the best choice for you.
2007-04-09 12:46:49
·
answer #3
·
answered by hopeartaspirer 3
·
2⤊
1⤋
There are so many reasons to have sex, it's hard to count them all. Generally, they include love, recreation, physical release, escape from problems, avoidance of other issues, restoring or maintaining relationships, gift-giving, a form of commerce, group activity, assertion of power, etc.
Naturally some of these can be harmful to one or more partners. However, since every situation is different, and every person as well, the individual events carry individual meanings. Even in sexual love there can be moments of escape or avoidance through sex.
So I was pleased to see your question, but it only sparked the reminder that sexual expression communicates a rainbow of messages, not simply love or fun.
- {ââ} - {ââ} - {ââ} -
2007-04-10 09:19:27
·
answer #4
·
answered by NHBaritone 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
depends because every1 is differnt as long as theyre ok with havin sex wit no strings attached then thats fiine but if theyre goin to regret it ltr then its a bad idea also havin sex with a starnger isnt the best idea there are too many std's out there and hiv and aids and all that things happen and condoms break if we had sex with ppl we actually knew were clean more often we would have less of a problem
2007-04-09 12:39:45
·
answer #5
·
answered by gottaloveme =] 1
·
1⤊
0⤋
it depends. I admire people who can have sex with no emotional involvement and just move on like they had only gone jogging or biking together. I tend to get emotionally attached to sexual partners so unless i want to be in a world of hurt, i do not have sex willy nilly.
Guys in my experience don't understand that. They think that if i don't want to have sex with them, i must not be attracted to them. Not. I just need to have some security in a relationship before i let myself get that vulnerable because if it fails, i am the one who will be left to pick up the pieces of my heart
2007-04-09 12:41:24
·
answer #6
·
answered by zosky 1
·
2⤊
1⤋
There have been too many hearts (and condoms) broken for me to give you *any* answer other than a big, *fat*, very emphatic, NO!
Ask surviving girlfriends or fiancees who got pregnant and/or got an STD - despite every precaution - then broke up with her boyfriend or fiance - or the boyfriend or fiance died - before the wedding ceremony took place. Or, ask "partners", after the condom broke and STDs, AIDs, etc., was discovered!
Of course, FDR, JFK, or "Slick Willy," "Waffle Willy," AKA: William (Bill) Jefferson (Blythe) Clinton, and many of the Hollywood elite, might disagree!
2007-04-09 13:26:01
·
answer #7
·
answered by trebor namyl hcaeb 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
I like your additional info! It's what I was going to answer when I read the question.
It's up to the person. Some folks feel that sex is special and should only be done with the one they love, others view it as sport. People should be allowed to make their own choice of partners.
2007-04-09 12:38:26
·
answer #8
·
answered by FTW 7
·
3⤊
1⤋
Sex is a very special and is a very important part of a relationship. That is why it should be reserved for marriage. Sex should not be casual and when people treat it casually, it causes the degradation of its the value.
2007-04-09 18:39:18
·
answer #9
·
answered by Adele R 1
·
1⤊
1⤋
Honestly I think if you hadn't had sex yet you should get it out of your system. You need to go "shopping in the candy store." Get all of your taste out, so that way when you fall in love with someone, you won't wonder or care what sex with someone else would be like.
2007-04-09 12:38:59
·
answer #10
·
answered by Adam 2
·
1⤊
1⤋