I honestly never wanted my "wife to be" to be a virgin.
Sort of developed the thought with one of my first girlfriends that was sort of “tricked” into having sex while she was very young. I was not exactly hurt through her not being a virgin, but more what ad happened to her.
My final conclusion was that shall my partner be a virgin, she is closed to a sexual comparison and thus years later she may end up asking herself: ‘have I really made the right choice?’ not knowing anything else to compare.
When a woman that has had more of a life’s experience can choose me as a partner with everything I am (Including sexually), she has chosen me with no doubts to develope later on.
I believe the reason people are so into “virgin” control for women is that it is simply provable. That there is actually a ceremony included to the process, where physically a mans first and last sexual intercourse is some what the same.
In fact BECAUSE of this “ceremony” and “provable” thingy I would really insist that girls DO watch out for where they loose their virginity. Not because of what others will think of, but for what the girl herself shall be thinking of as she looks down at the evidence she has of her first time. Or more importantly what she shall feel over how she lived an “only once in her life time” event.
It IS a stupid taboo, and it IS stupid to think that women are degradable for such reasons… but I believe that in the end it IS a very special gift that you ladies should give to a special person or a special moment. This person does not have to be your husband, it could even be your girlfriend or even an object… just as long as it is an event you have thought through and you don’t believe you will be sorry about later.
How ever you may have had your first; if your partner that means so much to you degrades you for not being a virgin, ditch him... he will never be able to love you the way a woman should be loved. It is a history and far from the end of the world.
More importantly: It is NONE of his business!
2007-09-01 22:15:34
·
answer #1
·
answered by blackdidthis 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
You are right, the difference is men have a more fragile ego
and men being with lots of women is just so socially exceptable. It isn't till you grow up that you realize having one good woman and making the relationship work makes you more of a man than just sleeping around, but on the other hand if you choose not to be in a relationship you should have the decency to be honest with who ever you sleep with and that rule aplies to both men and women.
2007-09-02 06:13:04
·
answer #2
·
answered by Mc Fly 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
I completely agree with you. But stop and think, if a guy is going around with a lot of girls, some of the girls must be doing it with a lot of guys. Truth is, girls don't talk about their conquests as much as guys do. There actually is no difference.
2007-09-02 04:31:42
·
answer #3
·
answered by duaneb_59 5
·
1⤊
1⤋
yup, age old hypocrisy, a complaint made by many.
I used to know a guy, who never described himself as a stud, for sleeping around. He took pleasure in describing himeslf as a s l u t . A sign of confidence, he didn't need to call himself a stud, to prop up his ego
2007-09-02 04:36:28
·
answer #4
·
answered by steven m 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
the difference is that if people thought it was disgraceful for a guy to get with lots of girls, he wouldn't care.
2007-09-02 04:30:30
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Just date or marry a man of good character.
2007-09-02 08:57:41
·
answer #6
·
answered by Lydia 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
It's just as disgraceful for guys to sleep around.....just follow your heart~
2007-09-02 05:38:36
·
answer #7
·
answered by jlp165 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
me 2
2007-09-02 04:29:46
·
answer #8
·
answered by puppy dog 2 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
heaps? you must be an ozzie.
i love ozzie chicks.. very sexy accent and usually pretty with nice bodies
2007-09-02 10:59:06
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
Yes I agree 2 ...........
2007-09-02 05:07:21
·
answer #10
·
answered by indian beauty 4
·
0⤊
1⤋