MissU28 Posted November 18, 2005 Share Posted November 18, 2005 In the immortal words of the late Johnny Cochran.No copulation without representation. Or was that Patrick Henry? Gotta go with Ghost here - its a meaningless word - if you're engaging in sexual activities, except the full-blown act (no pun intended), you're just parsing words. Sex is sex in my humble opinion. I think its great to have some elevated standard of what you will and won't do, and of course thats entirely personal. But to make some enormous deal (at least once you're an adult) about committing the actual act, I think is a mistake. It just creates a lot of needless guilt, and honestly, I think it robs you of truly enjoying a close relationship with someone. Just my opinion though. so if you're going out with a girl (hypothetically, I know most of you are married)...and she tells you she's not a virgin... because she's done everything BUT...you'd still be okay to be that first guy to have intercourse with her? It wouldn't make a difference to you? She has never experienced the "real" thing...but because you take the term so strictly to include ALL sexual experiences, that meaning is lost as well. I don't know about you all, but losing your virginity (TECHNICAL virginity) is a big deal. It's very different from oral, and that first time is a crucial part of someone's sexual life. I wouldn't take that so cavalierly just because they've done everything else BUT... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevenaa Posted November 18, 2005 Share Posted November 18, 2005 Sex of any kind is sex. Virginity has been traditionally accepted to mean no intercourse. So, technically someone engaging in oral sex may still be a virgin, but they are engaging in sex none the less. As far as labels go, having casual intercourse or casual oral sex is no different. It's just different types of sex. If you view some one who engages in gratuitous sex of the intercourse variety a slut, a person who engages in gratuitous oral sex would also be a slut. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tarhog Posted November 18, 2005 Share Posted November 18, 2005 so if you're going out with a girl (hypothetically, I know most of you are married)...and she tells you she's not a virgin... because she's done everything BUT...you'd still be okay to be that first guy to have intercourse with her? It wouldn't make a difference to you? She has never experienced the "real" thing...but because you take the term so strictly to include ALL sexual experiences, that meaning is lost as well. I don't know about you all, but losing your virginity (TECHNICAL virginity) is a big deal. It's very different from oral, and that first time is a crucial part of someone's sexual life. I wouldn't take that so cavalierly just because they've done everything else BUT... I can't answer objectively - my first serious girlfriend in high school was Catholic (religion isn't pertinent, it was just a part of her mindset) - we went out for a long time and she was extremely fixated on the whole 'virginity' thing. She viewed it like you do (that doesn't sound right - what I mean is how I 'think you are saying you view it'). She wanted to wait. Of course, everything but was fair game, and I probably had a more intense physical relationship with this girl than with any other woman in my life - bizarre since we never 'did it'. Problem was, it just became this huge 'thing' (and I NEVER pressured her) that it really kind of screwed up the relationship. She ended up going on to college after I did, and just busted loose and screwed everything that wasn't nailed down. It just freaked me out to be honest with you. She didn't share the experience with someone she loved and was extremely close to - and after she totally caved, her self-esteem was horrible. Just always struck me as a real waste of time and worry on her part. Particularly when we were highly sexual in every other way imaginable. So I have a lot of strange feelings about the topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Posted November 18, 2005 Author Share Posted November 18, 2005 Tarhog, I can relate to that. A girl I was with (for a year) refused to do the 'everything but' slate of activities but was OK with intercourse. Of course, she eventually spazzed out over that and it was never enjoyable for her (psychological/physical/both?) Wonder what has happened with her in the interim. If she didn't go through some major change, her future husband is in for a hell ofa surprise. And maybe the most passionate and intense sexual experiences I've EVER had were with someone who did not engage in anything that has 'sex' in it. And there was always in my mind the line between those 'sex' named acts and what we did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsHokieFan Posted November 18, 2005 Share Posted November 18, 2005 I am with Ghost on this one I don't see how oral sex does not constitute losing one's virginity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Die Hard Posted November 18, 2005 Share Posted November 18, 2005 I am with Ghost on this oneI don't see how oral sex does not constitute losing one's virginity Answer honestly. If, before you had sexual intercourse.... you went out with some girl and she gave you a "hand job" in the back seat of a car.... you wouldn't consider yourself a virgin any longer? Come on now. If a virgin female uses sexual devices... BEFORE she's ever had sexual intercourse with another male... does those particular acts of penetration not make her a virgin any more? And what if that type of penetration (ie. sexual devices) was done by a partner (ie. not masturbation).... is the female no longer considered a virgin? I think in all the scenarios presented above... we would unanimously agree that the female is still considered a virgin. Which leads to the conclusion that the only way to truly eliminate one's virginity is to engage in sexual intercourse. Having "sex" is one thing... fooling around is another. And a female/male can be a "slut" for having many partners... whether she's engaging in intercourse or only fooling around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsHokieFan Posted November 18, 2005 Share Posted November 18, 2005 Answer honestly. If, before you had sexual intercourse.... you went out with some girl and she gave you a "hand job" in the back seat of a car.... you wouldn't consider yourself a virgin any longer?Come on now. If a virgin female uses sexual devices... BEFORE she's ever had sexual intercourse with another male... does those particular acts of penetration not make her a virgin any more? And what if that type of penetration (ie. sexual devices) was done by a partner (ie. not masturbation).... is the female no longer considered a virgin? I think in all the scenarios presented above... we would unanimously agree that the female is still considered a virgin. Which leads to the conclusion that the only way to truly eliminate one's virginity is to engage in sexual intercourse. Having "sex" is one thing... fooling around is another. And a female/male can be a "slut" for having many partners... whether she's engaging in intercourse or only fooling around. As riddiculous as it may sound, the scenario you mentioned drove me nuts, being from the background I have I guess it really is one of those what is the meaning of "is" type deals. Personally its pretty black and white to me even though it sounds riddiculous in a practical sense Now if you were take the relgious and philiosophical implications out of it, I am with you Die Hard But I see it from a "book" perspective, and all the books are pretty black and white on this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChocolateCitySkin Posted November 18, 2005 Share Posted November 18, 2005 Seen Clerks recently? Snowball... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ax Posted November 18, 2005 Share Posted November 18, 2005 I guess times being what they are, the modern vocabulary will evolve to make due. To go along with the terms African/American, Italian/American, etc..., we now must add Vaginal/Virgin, Oral/Virgin, Mechanical/Virgin, etc... While I believe people still want "virgin" to mean no intercourse, I'm not sure it ever should have. It's just modern day people trying to hold on to an illusion of purity. I think kids today are more likely to engage in the "other" forms of sex than they were in my youth, but they want to think they're innocent. Like a lawyer finding a loophole in the law. To me, sex is sex. Once you have it, you're no longer a virgin. You just haven't "done it all" yet. No shame in it. It's been happening forever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grumpy Vet Posted November 18, 2005 Share Posted November 18, 2005 .....virgins.....is a women devoid of sexual contact So what you are saying is that Mrs. GV is a virgin? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimboDaMan Posted November 18, 2005 Share Posted November 18, 2005 I'm with Die Hard on this one. Its a specific word with a specific meaning - the absence of intercourse. And that meaning has not changed over time. It has always held that meaning. Consider the story - true or not - that Lady Diana underwent a medical exam before being accepted as Prince Charles' bride. You know what they were looking for - could any exam determine whether she'd ever been orally active? Of course not. "Virgin" has a specific meaning. And it makes sense. The act of intercourse is considered special and it has always been so. That is not to say that other activity is not sex, of course it is. But there's a lot of sexual activity that avoids this act that many cultures and religions hold special. There are plenty of virginal sluts out there, although for such girls people mostly focus on the "slut" and not the "virgin". That's not a contradiction at all. (Want to argue semantics, there are plenty of sluts who've never had any form of sex at all, look up the definition). If you're looking for a word that precludes any sexual contact at all, perhaps "chaste" will do. Although chaste, to me, is more of a current description, I suppose a reformed prostitute can be currently a chaste woman. So I don't know what word (other than demeaning ones like frigid) describes a female who has never had any form of sexual contact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beachwoodskinfan Posted November 18, 2005 Share Posted November 18, 2005 just out of curiosity, what defines "virgin" olive oil?? unstuffed right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChocolateCitySkin Posted November 18, 2005 Share Posted November 18, 2005 My eyes... so virginal cannot read this thread. :rubeyes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thiebear Posted November 18, 2005 Share Posted November 18, 2005 Virgin = no (partner) penetration of the nether-region. (my opinion) The "personal touch" electronic or otherwise doesn't count. A virgin is a person that has not had sex with another person. Linked with chastity and the first time connotations. Other wise they are known as: Loop-wholes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrockster21 Posted November 18, 2005 Share Posted November 18, 2005 just out of curiosity, what defines "virgin" olive oil?? unstuffed right? Virgin olive oil is the oil from the first pressing of the olives. It has nothing to do with stuffing the olives. They press them 4 or 5 times, and the very first pressing is the "extra-virgin" olive oil...etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MissU28 Posted November 18, 2005 Share Posted November 18, 2005 I'm with Die Hard on this one. Its a specific word with a specific meaning - the absence of intercourse. And that meaning has not changed over time. It has always held that meaning. Consider the story - true or not - that Lady Diana underwent a medical exam before being accepted as Prince Charles' bride. You know what they were looking for - could any exam determine whether she'd ever been orally active? Of course not. "Virgin" has a specific meaning. And it makes sense. The act of intercourse is considered special and it has always been so. That is not to say that other activity is not sex, of course it is. But there's a lot of sexual activity that avoids this act that many cultures and religions hold special. There are plenty of virginal sluts out there, although for such girls people mostly focus on the "slut" and not the "virgin". That's not a contradiction at all. (Want to argue semantics, there are plenty of sluts who've never had any form of sex at all, look up the definition). If you're looking for a word that precludes any sexual contact at all, perhaps "chaste" will do. Although chaste, to me, is more of a current description, I suppose a reformed prostitute can be currently a chaste woman. So I don't know what word (other than demeaning ones like frigid) describes a female who has never had any form of sexual contact. :applause: thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted November 18, 2005 Share Posted November 18, 2005 I have to agree with everyone that holds intercourse is required for one to lose his or her virginity. Die Hard made the strongest case by calling forth the memories of teenage years where it was very clear that you were a virgin until you made it to home plate. Getting a little freaky in the back seat was cool, but you were still a virgin until you “hit it” so to speak. Also having sex, intercourse, is a bigger deal then oral sex. The risk is far greater and you are now engaged in life creating activities. Yes you can get an STD from oral sex, but virginity was a term coined before such things were a primary concern. Some people think it’s the same thing but I think if you stop and think about it, it plainly isn’t. I think the real issue here is the annoyance that some have to people trying to find a virginity loophole. I’ve heard stories of people going so far as engaging in anal sex (I’m sorry if this is too vulgar) in an effort to avoid losing their virginity. I think in extreme cases like that one can argue that the technical term “virgin” no longer applies. But in more common situations where someone is just venturing out into the sexual world, I don’t think anything short of intercourse would equate to a loss of virginity. Also I see the word “slut” thrown around in this thread a lot. How many partners does a person have to be with before they are considered a slut? I dislike the word and find it often means “a good deal more then me” and little else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
China Posted November 18, 2005 Share Posted November 18, 2005 Virgin olive oil is the oil from the first pressing of the olives. It has nothing to do with stuffing the olives. They press them 4 or 5 times, and the very first pressing is the "extra-virgin" olive oil...etc. I think jrock has hit on something here. We can call the 'technical' virgins (i.e., those who haven't had intercourse, but who have done other things such as oral), virgins. And we can call those who have not engaged in any of these activities "extra-virgins." :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boss_Hogg Posted November 18, 2005 Share Posted November 18, 2005 In my experience you are a virgin if youve never had vaginal intercourse. agreed. Oral does not matter, hell it is illegal in North Carolina. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted November 18, 2005 Share Posted November 18, 2005 Seems to me that the word has an understood meaning that has changed as society has changed (ie. looser.) Is there any reason to think that this has not been the case throughout history (except maybe in the 1950s)? Pregnancy was unavoidable in the past, and had major consequences, but I bet teenagers in Ancient Rome and the Inca Empire and everywhere else found a way to express their newfound urges, just as young people today do.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted November 18, 2005 Share Posted November 18, 2005 By the way, I agree that we should stop using the word "slut" as a perjorative toward women. There is nothing wrong with sexual activity - it is a natural part of our human makeup and also fun as heck. It's not evil, it's not sinful, and it's not more reprehensible for a woman to enjoy it than it is for a man. Frankly, when I hear a man call a women a "slut," it reveals a lot more to me about the man who said it than it does about the woman of whom he speaks, and what it reveals is not positive. Basically, it shows me that deep down, the man is a bit of a mysogenist. I believe that if we are to keep using this archaic word, it should be toward both sexes, or even more, should be used only be as a compliment. God bless the sluts, and the happiness they bring into the world! :applause: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeanCollins Posted November 18, 2005 Share Posted November 18, 2005 the person he's arguing with is me Virginity means the person has not had intercourse. Plain and simple. Oh.....a clintonian view on sex eh! :rotflmao: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codeorama Posted November 18, 2005 Share Posted November 18, 2005 Answer honestly. If, before you had sexual intercourse.... you went out with some girl and she gave you a "hand job" in the back seat of a car.... you wouldn't consider yourself a virgin any longer?Come on now. Die Hard is the winner IMO. I totally understand what Ghost is saying however, but the word "virgin" generally means hasn't had vaginal sex. A girl can still be a ho AND still be a virgin IMO, but ultimately, we are talking about a word. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DjTj Posted November 18, 2005 Share Posted November 18, 2005 agreed. Oral does not matter, hell it is illegal in North Carolina. Interesting ... but what does the Commonwealth of Virginity say: Va. Code § 18.2-344 Fornication Any person, not being married, who voluntarily shall have sexual intercourse with any other person, shall be guilty of fornication, punishable as a Class 4 misdemeanor. Va. Code § 18.2-361 Crimes against nature A. If any person carnally knows in any manner any brute animal, or carnally knows any male or female person by the anus or by or with the mouth, or voluntarily submits to such carnal knowledge, he or she shall be guilty of a Class 6 felony --- Clearly there's a difference between "sexual intercouse" and "carnally knows ... by the anus or by or with the mouth." Losing your virginity before marriage is only a Class 4 misdemeanor while trying to avoid losing your virginity by messing around is a Class 6 felony. I'm pretty sure the law of the Commonwealth of Virginity is the authority here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MissU28 Posted November 18, 2005 Share Posted November 18, 2005 Interesting ... but what does the Commonwealth of Virginity say:Va. Code § 18.2-344 Fornication Any person, not being married, who voluntarily shall have sexual intercourse with any other person, shall be guilty of fornication, punishable as a Class 4 misdemeanor. Va. Code § 18.2-361 Crimes against nature A. If any person carnally knows in any manner any brute animal, or carnally knows any male or female person by the anus or by or with the mouth, or voluntarily submits to such carnal knowledge, he or she shall be guilty of a Class 6 felony --- Clearly there's a difference between "sexual intercouse" and "carnally knows ... by the anus or by or with the mouth." Losing your virginity before marriage is only a Class 4 misdemeanor while trying to avoid losing your virginity by messing around is a Class 6 felony. I'm pretty sure the law of the Commonwealth of Virginity is the authority here. damn...i'm a felon :paranoid: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.