WIll you wear a Purity ring?

The Jonas Brothers would like this topic very much.

I think it is ok starting at marriage (what i voted for), but would prefer to wait until after a few years of being married (even though I think marriage is kind of pointless to begin with thinking about it realistically).

The reason has to do with commitment. There are very few things we can use as a measurement of commitment. Would you say your wife talking to another man is cheating? I don't think so because it is a daily activity that is pretty much required if she wants a job. What about going out for lunch or dinner? Now we are getting into a more grey area. If the interactions were for business and were professional I don't think too many people would object. however, if she went out with another guy because she found him attractive and funny and wanted to spend time with him would we be jealous and consider that cheating? I think some people would be ok with it while others would not be ok with it. Now we get to physical interaction. Would you want your wife kissing or having sex with another man? I'm going to assume that a vast majority would say that is cheating and that she has proven that she is not commited to you (some might be ok with it, but they are such a small minority that they don't really matter).

So, sex seems like the thing that all or atleast most of us can agree is proof of commitment (there are other things such as love which could also be used, but not as easily). Now the question comes to "why does commitment start with marriage?" This is tricker to explain and is probably more subjective. The whole point of marriage is you being with *one* other person for the remainder of your life. This commitment doesn't truly start until you are actually married to the other person. However, we need to take time into account here (or more like NOT take it into account). We believe it is wrong to have sex with anyone other than your wife after you have been married. The funny thing is your wife could cheat on you 5 minutes before the ceremony and I'd be willing to bet you would consider it cheating. How is it any different if it happend 5 minutes of 5 years before? She's still the same person, she still loves you, she still wants to be married to you, yet you would say that 5 minutes before was cheating and 5 years was not simply because she didn't know you or wasn't interested in you at the time? That makes absolutely no sense. Commitment is Commitment regardless of time, and I've already shown that we DO want commitment.

If you went up to your girlfriend/wife and looked her in the eyes and said "I am not commited to you", what do you think she would think? She would think you are a lying cheating good-for-nothing boyfriend (I'm just guessing here). But then you say "actually i was talking about 2 years ago, but i'm commited to you right now", and now she is happy because for some reason, as long as you weren't with her at that time, it is ok. I don't think there is a good justification for believing it is ok to have had sex two years before but not two minutes. Someone can say "but that was a different relationship and things change." Yeah, but the point of remaining commited to someone is completely defeated if you have had multiple sexual partners (because sex is one of the few things that is proof of commitment). You can't be truly commited if you've already proven that you aren't commited. "I'm commited to you, baby" but then a year ago you may have said the same thing to another woman. It just seems inconsistent.

I don't agree with the idea that traditional marriage (i'm talking about the actual act of walking down the isle and saying some words) is the time you have to wait for before you can have sex. What I think all of this means is we want commitment from our significant other both before and after we commit ourselves to them. How do we know if they are commited to us? Basically both of you have to acknowledge that you want to be with each other for the rest of your lives (essentially marriage, but without the signing of papers, the party, the clothes, the priest/judge etc... its between two people and that is all that matters), and they have to have saved themselves for you. These both require trust because there really isn't a way to "prove" that you havn't had sex or that you truly intend on being with that one person for the rest of your life. The hope is that you find someone who is a good person who you have reason to believe wouldn't lie to you (and if you can't, you probably shouldn't be with that person just anyways).

It isn't like this is a fool-proof plan. There are a lot of bad and immoral people out there who will lie to get things they want, and that isn't going to go away. It would take a lot of self-control to be able to remain commited to this idea.

I'm thinking the greatest objection to this would be "Well, you are imagining a world where people just automatically know who the right person is." My answer is that that is not true. You will obviously have to spend time with possibly multiple people to decide who the right person is (if you even WANT only one person for your life). But I talked about that earlier. Talking or being around another person is not an indicator of commitment - sex is.

tl;dr It's a fantasy that I live by and nobody but myself is going to think the reasons I gave are good reasons to wait until "marriage". I think it is right to wait until you are commited to one person for the rest of your life, but I don't necessarily think you have to be legally or religiously married to them to be commited. I think sex is one of the only things you can use as a measurement of commitment beyond two peoples' acknowledgement of their commitment to each other.

Man, I must be the most conservative athiest on the forums.

Edit: And no, I wouldn't wear a purity ring. I don't think people need to/should wear jewelry.

In looking back, at the least with me personally I very much acknowledge that me engaging in these acts were very much willful on my part. I never intentionally sought to coerce the girl I was with to go along with me but I certainly did do nothing to stop what was occurring. I had the chance, so I gave in.

Certainly there is a degree of pressure to "do the deed" but I can do not blame anyone but myself.

However, I would like to note that I am certain that my experiences with these things are quite differently than what many females face. Many guys are quite forceful or at the very least subtly coerce the girl to do as he pleases. I truly hate that females have to deal with such self-seeking men in this day. In other words, I blame guys for not standing up for what is right, for not making explicit boundaries beforehand, and for not treating ladies as ladies rather than objects. Guys - like myself - are idiots when we do not seek what is right and proper (and I'm certain many will disagree with me on this subject as for what is right and proper).

To summarize my thoughts here: I blame myself more than anything for not treating the ladies in my life as beautiful creations of God.

Also of note, I do not mind questions such as these. :P

mindstorm

Well that's good to know :P Sometimes I can be quite blunt and just blurt out questions about anything.

Would I be right in assuming that there was a, possibly naive, part of you that thought that the girl or girls that you 'dallied' with were the one that you intended to marry at the time? Or did you have more of a 'wild' phase where you turned into the Fonz for a while (for want of a better example =D)?

I suppose I wonder whether you would have stuck with a 'not before marriage' pledge if you had happened to find a girl with as firm a belief in it as you had. I think it's quite easy to blame boys for being pushy at times, but in many respects girls can be just as forceful, I certainly knew girls at school - and plenty of women since - who were frustrated by their partner's inclination to wait.

I do find it interesting though, observing society in general, how following the whole feminism palava and all that jazz attempting to bring about an end to chauvinism should bring about an end to chivalry also. I mean I know I'm a pretty old-school in that respect, if I had my way everyone would behave as though they were in a 50's Doris Day film, but an inclination to belittle women rather than respecting them and treating them like a lady seems to be the sort of polite idea for society that seems 'square' to the youth of today. Here in the UK I firmly believe it's because of the severe decline in religious influence since WWII. Bluntly put communities that have rejected religion seem to have rejected any sort of moral compass (obviously I don't mean that individually a person who does not believe in God is then automatically an immoral person).

When I first read about the Silver Ring thing (I had left school by the time it became a thing over here in the UK) I remember thinking it seemed a good idea if only for providing more timid teens with a reason for waiting. Though waiting until marriage was never part of my particular Christian make-up (lol not that I really can call myself Christian I suppose, I can't really claim much in the way of any sort of purity, but hey I've got faith, belief and good intentions, which is a start of sorts :P) I still can see the appeal of waiting for the right person. I waited a long time - years - after splitting with my ex before sleeping with another man (women were a different matter but... eh, it's complicated) and I found the wait very rewarding once I eventually found another person I really did trust at that very intimate level.

I have found myself pondering all this recently because I have found myself in a situation where I believe a society more inclined towards commitment and marriage rather than youthful promiscuity would have been easier for me in a strange way. I happened to fall for someone quite a bit older than me but in the end it seemed too complicated to continue - despite our genuine sincere regard for each other - not because of our incompatibilities but rather because of the reactions and incredulity of his friends and mine alike.

It's tough to explain, but the awkwardness of our 'what are we, what is this' part of the relationship was exasperated by other's beliefs that it 'obviously' wouldn't work, and I think it would have been much easier for us if we had been able to face those doubters on a firmer footing provided by a simpler social understanding of relationships (i.e. you meet, you woo, you marry, end of).

:lol: I really am sorry for rambling all this at you, I guess since my old parish priest retired I've not really had anyone to bounce these sort of semi-theological ponderings off of, the new Rev would probably have a seizure if I mentioned it to him.

tl:dr - That's OK. None of this ramble is of any importance whatsoever.

Well that's good to know :P Sometimes I can be quite blunt and just blurt out questions about anything.

Would I be right in assuming that there was a, possibly naive, part of you that thought that the girl or girls that you 'dallied' with were the one that you intended to marry at the time? Or did you have more of a 'wild' phase where you turned into the Fonz for a while (for want of a better example =D)?

MissLibrarian

I very much had every intention to marry her. I was in the process of saving to buy an engagement ring even.

I suppose I wonder whether you would have stuck with a 'not before marriage' pledge if you had happened to find a girl with as firm a belief in it as you had. I think it's quite easy to blame boys for being pushy at times, but in many respects girls can be just as forceful, I certainly knew girls at school - and plenty of women since - who were frustrated by their partner's inclination to wait.

MissLibrarian

I agree it would have been easier. As stated I do not wish to simply push blame. I know there were a lot of good intentions and that it was not simply a matter of pure self-centeredness - ethical choices are usually more complex than absolute good against absolute evil. However, the wrong choices were indeed made in this situation.

I do find it interesting though, observing society in general, how following the whole feminism palava and all that jazz attempting to bring about an end to chauvinism should bring about an end to chivalry also. I mean I know I'm a pretty old-school in that respect, if I had my way everyone would behave as though they were in a 50's Doris Day film, but an inclination to belittle women rather than respecting them and treating them like a lady seems to be the sort of polite idea for society that seems 'square' to the youth of today. Here in the UK I firmly believe it's because of the severe decline in religious influence since WWII. Bluntly put communities that have rejected religion seem to have rejected any sort of moral compass (obviously I don't mean that individually a person who does not believe in God is then automatically an immoral person).

When I first read about the Silver Ring thing (I had left school by the time it became a thing over here in the UK) I remember thinking it seemed a good idea if only for providing more timid teens with a reason for waiting. Though waiting until marriage was never part of my particular Christian make-up (lol not that I really can call myself Christian I suppose, I can't really claim much in the way of any sort of purity, but hey I've got faith, belief and good intentions, which is a start of sorts :P) I still can see the appeal of waiting for the right person. I waited a long time - years - after splitting with my ex before sleeping with another man (women were a different matter but... eh, it's complicated) and I found the wait very rewarding once I eventually found another person I really did trust at that very intimate level.

I have found myself pondering all this recently because I have found myself in a situation where I believe a society more inclined towards commitment and marriage rather than youthful promiscuity would have been easier for me in a strange way. I happened to fall for someone quite a bit older than me but in the end it seemed too complicated to continue - despite our genuine sincere regard for each other - not because of our incompatibilities but rather because of the reactions and incredulity of his friends and mine alike.

It's tough to explain, but the awkwardness of our 'what are we, what is this' part of the relationship was exasperated by other's beliefs that it 'obviously' wouldn't work, and I think it would have been much easier for us if we had been able to face those doubters on a firmer footing provided by a simpler social understanding of relationships (i.e. you meet, you woo, you marry, end of).

:lol: I really am sorry for rambling all this at you, I guess since my old parish priest retired I've not really had anyone to bounce these sort of semi-theological ponderings off of, the new Rev would probably have a seizure if I mentioned it to him.

tl:dr - That's OK. None of this ramble is of any importance whatsoever.

MissLibrarian

No worries. I personally wish more people were inclined to speak with such truthful ramblings. :P

No

inb4 kcube becomes a huge whore

i don't need to wear one since i've never going to have sex.

Generally so far have been abstinent in so far as not having the actual intercourse yet. cannot say the same for other things like oral and such.

so would i wear a purity ring? no. seems rather silly and i don't need to announce it to the world.

and for the record for the time being i've just practiced abstinence for my own reasons, both personal and religious ones. That said i cannot say that would be the case forever if the right person came along.

The only person that wears a purity ring is someone that needs some sort of visual encouragement that they're doing the "right" thing. So that probably won't last long anyway...