Posted on 12/13/2008 4:13:29 AM PST by reaganaut1
The paradigm has shifted. Dating is dated. Hooking up is here to stay.
...
To help me understand this phenomenon, I called Kathleen Bogle, a professor at La Salle University in Philadelphia who has studied hooking up among college students and is the author of the 2008 book, “Hooking Up: Sex, Dating and Relationships on Campus.”
It turns out that everything is the opposite of what I remember. Under the old model, you dated a few times and, if you really liked the person, you might consider having sex. Under the new model, you hook up a few times and, if you really like the person, you might consider going on a date.
I asked her to explain the pros and cons of this strange culture. According to her, the pros are that hooking up emphasizes group friendships over the one-pair model of dating, and, therefore, removes the negative stigma from those who can’t get a date. As she put it, “It used to be that if you couldn’t get a date, you were a loser.” Now, she said, you just hang out with your friends and hope that something happens.
The cons center on the issues of gender inequity. Girls get tired of hooking up because they want it to lead to a relationship (the guys don’t), and, as they get older, they start to realize that it’s not a good way to find a spouse. Also, there’s an increased likelihood of sexual assaults because hooking up is often fueled by alcohol.
That’s not good. So why is there an increase in hooking up? According to Professor Bogle, it’s: the collapse of advanced planning, lopsided gender ratios on campus, delaying marriage, relaxing values and sheer momentum.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
You wrote:
“The relative consequences of sex versus virginity depends on one’s age.”
No, SOME consequences are relatively lessened or worsened depending upon age. As you yourself note:
“Certainly, an unplanned pregnancy is much more traumatic at age fifteen than at age twenty-five.”
“What about STD’s? Certainly STD’s would be very traumatic to a teenager with a life expectancy of decades.”
And no teenager would catch an STD if they just waited.
“But an octogenarian is not likely to have a long life expectancy in any case.”
So he should be out there screwin’ everything? So, you believe the morality of sexual activity is only dependent upon the outcome? There is no right or wrong in your world. There is only bad days and good sex?
“Now let us examine the other side, which is virginity.
Virginity is not disturbing at thirteen, since almost everyone that age is a virgin.”
Disturbing? Are you honestly going to tell me virginity in itself is disturbing?
“But what about age thirty? Imagine someone knowing that everyone else that he knows, including his own family, has had sex and he had not.”
1) Imagine someone not obsessing over what he was born with. 2) Imagine you not thinking virginity is bad just because it exists. 3) Do you realize how disturbed you sound claiming that virginity is disturbing?
“How would he feel?”
So his feelings are now the standard of right and wrong? So, as long as he salves those feelings it’s okay, right? Rape? Well, at least he won’t be a virgin! Prostitution? Well, at least he won’t be a virgin!
“What would be the only rational way for him to feel?”
Only? Are you serious? My friend, you need to meet more people. I know people far older than me who are virgins. Now, they chose virginity as a life long committment because of their faith and they haven’t suffered at all. It seems to me that you are essentially describing someone who doesn’t really exist.
“And what would his peers think of it?”
What would it matter? Are you honestly suggesting that going with the flow and being accepted by his peers is absolutely necessary in life? For what? Happiness? So you want all the earth’s population to be wishy washy with no real moral fiber whatsoever so that no one sticks out like a sore thumb for going against the grain? How idiotic is that? Are you sure you want to be here at FreeRepublic? Seriously, now, most people here are not into group think at all, but you apparently are. I hope you remember this if you ever catch your teenage daughter servicing your neighbor.
“Note again that the value of the opinions of one’s peers increase with age.”
They do? Strange. All the people I know care less and less about what other people think about them as they age. You seem haunted by the opinions of your peers. I just do what is right and don’t worry much about what others think.
“At thirteen, one’s peers are dumbass kids. At thirty, one’s peers would include people who are married and have kids and can support themselves.”
And? Again, I know people far older than me who are virgins and have chosen to be so even though they could have had many paramours. I respect them for their dedication. I, in fact, know a number of people - married with children - who have virgins in their families (aunts, uncles, brothers, sisters, etc.) and it’s just not a big deal.
I remember when I met a young woman who was a member of a lay religious order. She was absolutely beautiful. Honestly, there is probably not an actress in Hollywood who could campare favorably to her in her face and figure. She was just incredibly beautiful. And she was a consecrated virgin. She will be a virgin her whole life. She will not suffer. She loves God most. She will belong to Him and only Him. Good for her. He will be more faithful, loyal and loving to her than any man could be. But you would consider that young woman a freak, right?
You wrote:
“It is more about measuring up to those around you,..”
Measuring up? Are you a 15 year old trading locker room “score” stories? Any MAN who thinks he doesn’t measure up to others in society just because he’s a virgin is no man at all.
If some 25 year old man told me he was a virgin I know exactly what my response would be: And?
Those aren’t the reasons I meant at all. In fact, other peoples’ opinions are worth very little to me, unless that person is a mentor in some way. Not that I don’t care about people in my life - far from it.
But chastity is all about two things, or three, really:
1. Obedience to God, and thereby keeping one’s inner heart uncluttered from sinful reaction (aka “karma”) in order to more clearly hear His voice from within
2. Respect for one’s own body - since it is a gift from God and in the highest sense, a temple
3. Similar respect for others, by not treating them as a sexual toy
She loves God most. She will belong to Him and only Him. Good for her. He will be more faithful, loyal and loving to her than any man could be. But you would consider that young woman a freak, right?I will not knock her for her sexual disorientation any more than I would knock Melissa Etheridge for her sexual disorientation.
So, you believe the morality of sexual activity is only dependent upon the outcome?Are not moral lessons taught because of outcomes? Are we not taught to not lie, cheat, and steal because of how it would affect us as well as others? Are we not taught to remain faithful to whomever we marry because of how it would affect them as well as what it would prove about us?
And no teenager would catch an STD if they just waited.Even if they stop waiting by getting married, they could still catch STD's if their spouses (pl?) become infected as a result of an adulterous affair, or even rape.
There is no right or wrong in your world.Of course there is right and wrong.
Rape? Well, at least he won’t be a virgin! Prostitution? Well, at least he won’t be a virgin!To resort to either would prove to the world that he is so pathetic that he can not relate to adults in a consensually sexual way. And this does not even address what happens to the victim .
Disturbing? Are you honestly going to tell me virginity in itself is disturbing?It depends on the circumstances.
Bad emotional attachments through sex? NoneBad feelings over failing where everyone else succeeded? Sometimes.
Loss of reputation? None.That would depend on the attitudes of people who are important to her.
you wrote:
“I will not knock her for her sexual disorientation any more than I would knock Melissa Etheridge for her sexual disorientation.”
What? You’re actually equating virginity with homosexuality? So a virgin boy would be the same as two men having anal sex? Are you serious? Do you even think about these bizarre, intellectually vapid comment you post when you write them?
“Are not moral lessons taught because of outcomes?”
No, they are not. Moral lessons - properly taught - begin with a view of the mindset, the intention and the circumstances. The outcome is only one part. You really are confused aren’t you?
“Are we not taught to not lie, cheat, and steal because of how it would affect us as well as others?”
No. We are taught not to lie because it violates God’s law. We talk about how it effects others as a way to help make the lesson relevant, but never as the only part of the lesson. I sure hope you’re not a teacher. You would put the cart before the horse...and not know what the horse was for either.
“Are we not taught to remain faithful to whomever we marry because of how it would affect them as well as what it would prove about us?”
Again, no. We are taught to remain faithful first and foremost because to act otherwise would be a violation of God’s law. Also, we take vows in marriage which we are obligated to uphold because we took them. How the adultery would effect the spouse is only the third part of the lesson. Like I said, I sure hope you’re not a teacher.
“Even if they stop waiting by getting married, they could still catch STD’s if their spouses (pl?) become infected as a result of an adulterous affair, or even rape.”
Unlikely. 1) If those teens stopped what they were doing that would include their future spouses as well to some extent. 2) A woman who is smart and decent enough to wait until marriage would be less likely to choose a cheater as a spouse. 3) And rape is rare and rarely are STDs spread that way.
“Of course there is right and wrong.”
Not in your world.
“To resort to either would prove to the world that he is so pathetic that he can not relate to adults in a consensually sexual way. And this does not even address what happens to the victim .”
Wait a minute. You were earlier waxing pathetic about poor, downtrodden virgins who hated themselves and were ashamed to be around their deflowered friends. Well, if those poor virgins were so hot to trot and lose their virginity why hasn’t it happened? Are they social misfits then? Wouldn’t that be the problem - THE REAL PROBLEM - and not their virginity? See, you’re shifting gears. You are all worried about adult virgins because they must not want to be virgins (in your mind), but you would think an adult virgin who buys sex is pathetic? Why? And how is one of those downtrodden virgins buying sex any more pathetic than people repeatedly hooking up just to see if they like someone?
“It depends on the circumstances.”
Get serious. Virginity is not disturbing. You need help.
you wrote:
“Bad feelings over failing where everyone else succeeded? Sometimes.”
Whoa! So people should be so shallow that they should have “bad feelings over failing” to be in a meaningless sexual encounter called a hook up?
Are you a 14 year old? You sure act like one.
Seriously, if you’re basing your world view on people that shallow then no wonder you’re views are so bizarrely wrong.
“That would depend on the attitudes of people who are important to her.”
No. The correct response is: If someone tells you that your reputation, your worth, is dependent upon having meaningless sexual hook ups, then that person is not worth considering important.
Your view is clearly different. You think shallow people should be exalted and treated as if their opinions are important. I can’t wait until you tell your kids that they should do whatever their friends want - sex, drugs, crime, whatever - because, well, gee, those little pissant friends of theirs are sooooooo important to impress, right?
Again, do you even ATTEMPT to think this stuff through before you post it?
Whoa! So people should be so shallow that they should have “bad feelings over failing” to be in a meaningless sexual encounter called a hook up?You are assuming that a hook-up for sex is somehow wrong in and of itself. It is not.
Seriously, if you’re basing your world view on people that shallow then no wonder you’re views are so bizarrely wrong.Some people view adult virginity as a sexual disorientation. Whether or not their view is important is dependent on their relationship with others.
You think shallow people should be exalted and treated as if their opinions are important.It depends on how successful they are.
I can’t wait until you tell your kids that they should do whatever their friends want - sex, drugs, crime, whatever - because, well, gee, those little pissant friends of theirs are sooooooo important to impress, right?There are more important people to impress.
What? You’re actually equating virginity with homosexuality? So a virgin boy would be the same as two men having anal sex? Are you serious? Do you even think about these bizarre, intellectually vapid comment you post when you write them?Homosexuality (at any age) and adult virginity are sexual disorientations. They are different types of disorientations, but disorientations nonetheless. And they are sexual disorientations that I object to.
And how is one of those downtrodden virgins buying sex any more pathetic than people repeatedly hooking up just to see if they like someone?Hooking up is on equal terms.
You wrote:
“You are assuming that a hook-up for sex is somehow wrong in and of itself. It is not.”
No, I am assuming that hook ups are meaningless sexual encounters. After all, I said: “to be in a meaningless sexual encounter called a hook up?” Care to try again?
“Some people view adult virginity as a sexual disorientation.”
Some people view homosexuality as normal. You think virginity is disturbing. See? Both of those views are comparably bizarre.
“Whether or not their view is important is dependent on their relationship with others.”
No. The importance of their views is determined by the worth of the view itself. If you’re friends laugh at you because you’re dumb enough to believe the earth is flat, it is your view that is wrong and not your friends nor your relationship with them. If you are dumb enough to believe that your relationship with a person actually determines the correctness of a view that actually has nothing directly to do with them, then yeah, you’re dumb enough.
If you believed that babies should be fried in a pan and seasoned with pepper would it matter what your relationship with people is to determine whether or not your actions are wrong? No. No matter how much you want your friends’ approval or they want yours, you would still be scum for frying babies in a pan. You, of course, can’t see this because your bizarre situation ethics by popular acceptance blinds you to it.
“It depends on how successful they are.”
No. Shallow people are never successful at what is important - being a good person. They are superficial. They are surface dirt. The very fact that you think that success of a person is what determines the worth of their opinions proves you’re no conservative. Admit it. You’re a liberal plant. You came here on Nov. 5th? Riddle me this, was Jane Fonda worth listening to when she went to North Vietnam just because she was a successful actress? Or, rather, were her views still lousy because she was still a traitor to her country no matter how successful she was?
“There are more important people to impress.”
Not according to you. Make up your mind.
You wrote:
“Homosexuality (at any age) and adult virginity are sexual disorientations.”
Once again, you’re not defining adult. So are you saying that all virgins should be deflowered on their 18th birthday? And are you really claiming that all adult virgins are sexual deviants of some sort? Seriously, Orthodox Jews, conservative Christians, and so forth are all sexual deviants if they choose to remain virgins until they’re married? Are you nuts?
“They are different types of disorientations, but disorientations nonetheless. And they are sexual disorientations that I object to.”
You object to virginity? You object to people remaining in the natural state they were born into until they’re married? Who is harmed by virginity? Please don’t post crappola about supposed harm from virginity. There is no such harm. This is proved by millions and millions of people around the world EVERY DAY.
“Hooking up is on equal terms.”
No, it isn’t. Did you even bother to read the posts in the thread? Girls are CLEARLY at a disadvantage. They are being used and are often harmed by it. Again, read the three books I mentioned. You clearly have no idea of what you’re talking about...and it shows.
Just TELL your daughter. Tell her in her early teens. Tell her while you are watching a movie in which women are either treated as sex objects or are being glorified for acting like them. Tell her what horny boys want, and ask if that jibes with her Cinderella fantasies. Tell her about jokes that guys laugh at knowingly, like the “coyote” jokes about the morning after.
And hang around her every afternoon and evening, and know (not only by her mouth) where she is when you are not with her. The older she gets while still innocent, the better your chances are.
This scheme means you can’t carefully watch her until puberty and then go back to work full time the second she is old enough to stay home alone. It’s a common move but a bad one. Teenagers need almost as much supervision as toddlers.
No, not Amish. We are not alone. There are a host of families around the country who still practice this kind of hands-off, supervised courtship. Mind you, we are home schoolers, and we were teaching these principles to our children from age 4.
These kinds of things can not be easily taught to young people if you wait till they’re already in high school, especially if they’ve already been dating around and had their lusts stirred up.
We’ve been called “abnormal.” But we believe that allowing a 16 year-old boy and 16 year-old girl run around in a car together is what is abnormal.
Girls are CLEARLY at a disadvantage. They are being used and are often harmed by it.So how are they harmed more so than boys?
Tell her what horny boys want, and ask if that jibes with her Cinderella fantasies.What if she wants to do it?
You object to people remaining in the natural state they were born into until they’re married?I object to people remaining in that particular natural state as adults.
She probably does. But hormonally speaking, girls had the same desires in earlier times too. What kept them from going all the way in the back seat? Fear of losing their reputations. Fear of being hurt. Being told that these guys didn't REALLY love you, and then would walk away after you "gave in." Stories about other girls who gave in, and were shamed with either being dropped or called a whore, or leaving town to visit their "Aunt" for 9 months.
Also, sometimes, it will still happen. A teen girl WILL have sex with a boy. You'd like to hope that it wouldn't mean thereafter that she will stay sexually active weekly forever at that point. You'd like her to be able to see it as a whoopsie, a mistake, and go back to living more chastely for a few years.
What kept them from going all the way in the back seat? Fear of losing their reputations.Reputation, aka what other people think of you, is important.
Fear of being hurt.How exactly does it hurt?
you wrote:
“So how are they harmed more so than boys?’
My gosh, you don’t even know about the mental differences between men and women?
You really need help.
you wrote:
“I object to people remaining in that particular natural state as adults.”
Your objection is irrational.
“Just because it is natural does not mean it is good.”
Just because you say so doesn’t make it bad. Nature makes more sense than you do.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.