When Virgins Collide.

by Englishman 4 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Englishman

  Back in the 60's virginity was IN. The WT magazine even went so far as to refer to single non-virgin women as being "Like a towel that anyone can wipe their hands on" and featured a pic of an ashamed looking women with a dirty towel behind her. How could a man contemplate marrying such a woman?

  Those years were my teenage years, and I saw many of my contemporaries enter into marriage as inexperienced virgins. Since then, not one of these many marriages has survived, almost without exception due to one or both parties feeling a need to have experience with other partners.

  So, my question is whether virginity is ultimately a good thing in marriage, will a one-partner-only person always wonder whether the grass isn't greener elsewhere and eventually have to stray to find out?

  Englishman.

  Nostalgia isn't what it used to be....
• 

  SixofNine

  I don't know. But I suspect you are right.

  I do know that I was always told that a virgin was more "desirable" to a man, to the point of such desire was made to seem part of the natural makeup of man. I remember it was never high on my list of things that made a woman desirable for me though. In fact, w/o the idea having been "sold" to me, I think it wouldn't be on my list at all. Perhaps just in a purely recreational or ego sense, ie; I could show her a better first time than what she'll probably get from some boy!

  It makes me wonder if, for men who do see virginity as a big deal, it isn't a desire to exploit the girls lack of experience.
• 

  Francois

  I remember reading in one of Margaret Mead's works that a woman was considered unmarriageable until she had a child, proving that she was a)fertile and b)knew how to get that way.

  It's amazing that JWs and other fundys think that young people can read about sex right up to their marriage day, and then leap between she sheets with high expectations and are almost always let down.

  I regarding virginity as do the JWs and other fundy groups, they are essentially participating in a religious practice that's over 3,000 years old: an anachronism, one that keeps them tied to and frozen in a tribal form of worship that should have ended centuries ago.

  And who is responsible for this outrage? The Imams, the Popes, the Governing Body and the people who - unable to think for themselves - follow these ignorant fools.

  And if you stop and think about it, a very great deal of the problems we suffer on this planet today is the result of the fundamentalist lunatic fringe of every religious philosophy: the Taliban; the fundy fringe of Hinduism, Sikhism, and Tamilism; and Lord knows the Christian faith has saddled the world with a bloody blanket consisting of the fundamentalism that gave us the Crusades, the Inquisition, the Salem witch trials, and the quaint and totally erroneous teachings about such things as the medical use of blood, harboring child molesters, shunning, and many other examples of the bastardization of the Master's message of Love for one another.

  This country now finds itself in a selective war against the most egregious form of Islamic fundamentalism - the Taliban. I personally think that struggle should be expanded to include ALL fundamentalist teachings and practices everywhere - leaving a world of moderation capable of practicing Jesus' concepts of love for God and love for one another. We'll never get past the Mexican stand-off we always seem to be in as long as we tolerate the intolerance of fundamentalism, that spiritual cancer in our midst.

  F.
• 

  Teirce

  Er, why do I get the feeling that an (older) woman's virginity might indicate the presense of some emotional baggage that will take some dealing with? Enforced virginity is about as close to robbing the cradle as you can get. Not saying we should return to the happy times where girls were married off at 12. But, the only thing virginity is advantaging the owner in, after becoming an adult, is freedom from desease, which can be guarded against by many other means (particularly monogamy or being selective). If a father of a house desires that he not have to deal with the consequences of a pregnant daughter (or fathering son), yeah, I can get behind that. But if she gets out and supports herself, there's zero reason for virginity, unless one has a classical "Vestal Virgin" kind of happy, ideal asthetic, which is just dandy.

  I think one of the indirect advantages (and who knows, the Society may have actually designed for this) is that the horny, non-comprehensive marriages of young persons, combined with the sanction against divorce, resulted in unhappy, unfulfilling unions that actually produced more stress that could be harnessed and redirected into the preaching work. Imagine, You marry someone you feel is a hot potato, yet they turn out to want quite different things, have quite different habits, have different levels of morals and conscience, and it drives you stark raving mad. Since you can't relate to your spouse on a.. philosophical, personal level (that has nothing to do with the Society), and you aren't permitted to associate with non-witnesses, that leaves either hanging with Witness buddies, or just getting out in service more to get association with other Witnesses. Therefore, it didn't just pay off to make people sexually frustrated, but also emotionally frustrated by being blinded by the sex, first.

  For myself, I was married for a year, and it taught me (what I feel) was 20 years worth of lesson. Now I have what I want to call a wonderful relationship, but That is based on the fact that it Isn't set in stone, because both people are not locked in stone, but instead believe in the Principle of staying together, rather that the Law of doing so. (sorry for the soapboxy capitol letters..)
• 

  Esmeralda

  Hey E-man! :)

  All I can tell ya is, on my first wedding night we were both virgins, and let me tell you...he didn't know anything then and never learned anything in seven years *lol* True story here for your enjoyment: I'd never seen a naked man before my wedding night, and I literally had to bite my lip to keep from laughing out loud *lol* I just couldn't believe what I was seeing *roflmao* I definitely should have had more sex education.

  I think the 'grass is greener' thing might be true in some cases. But people also have that in 'worldly' (sorry, only word I can think of here) marriages where they've both had plenty of experience before. Some people just aren't monogamous.

  The only two men I've been with are men I've married, and there is no 'grass is greener' mystery for me. I know how lucky I am :) But really there never was, even in my first marriage. I didn't leave just because he was bad in bed. I left because he mistreated me.

  My JW sister is still to this day so livid that I didn't "wait" for marriage with my second husband before consummating. I told her that I wouldn't ever again marry a man when I didn't know how he was going to treat me.

  My second husband is younger than I am but wasn't a virgin either, and he has no complaints ;) Of course, he was never a JW and so has no sexual hang ups at all. What a difference.

  My ex husband, meanwhile still can't see me without having to comment if I change my hair, get a new blouse, etc. He still looks at me in a way that makes my skin crawl.

  I think that the big issue with virginal marriages failing isn't even necesarily the 'grass is greener' thing, but that JW kids marry because of raging hormones and don't really know who they're planning to spend their lives with. It's the morning after when the problems really begin.

  I'm rambling? Am I rambling? *lol* The subject of sex still makes me giggle.

  *hugs*
  essie