He's celibate until marriage, and dates won't tolerate it

Chicago Sun-Times ^ | June 15, 2003 | Mary Mitchell

[Stone Mountain]

If that is true, how much more responsibility lies in actions that may result in the creation of a life?

I don't know what you want me to say. I've acknowledged that it's a great responsibility, the greatest I would ever take on in this life. This is why I take actions to minimize it happening.

[Stone Mountain]

I want to repeat my last question to you: Are you saying that it isn't possible for anyone to fall in love if they engage in pre-marital sex?
I don't quite understand how you got that out of what I wrote, but the answer is "NO".

So when you said, "Your attitude is shallow, and I'd bet that your love for any woman is shallow as well." what did you base that on? I admit that I was just guessing about the pre-marital sex part, but I didn't know what other information about me you had to come to this conclusion.

I also am puzzled as to why it seems such a burden to abstain until such time as you have found and married a woman that you can and would want to spend a lifetime with, and be able to then enjoy the sexual union that much more? It would be worth the wait, and it would not do you any harm.

If you don't understand why it would be such a burden, I don't think I can explain it to you. It is important to me to connect with women I am seeing on that level. It is also important to the women I see. Other than in the anonymity of a forum such as this, I only discuss these matters with my partner, and do not feel that anyone besides my partner and myself know what is and isn't worth doing in our realationship. I would never claim that my way is the only way, but it is working for myself and my partners. I believe I am happier and will be happier this way. You believe that you are and will be happier practicing abstinence until marriage. Different strokes, etc.

I'm not trying to force my beliefs on anyone, nor could I.

I agree. But what you are doing, is passing judgement on my life given very little information about it. I don't consider this forcing your beliefs on me - I'm glad to hear anyone's opinion and I don't hold it against people that they disaree with me, nor do I consider opposing views coercive. I am trying to point out to you, however, that when you call my attitude shallow and my relationships with women shallow, it is based purely on a prejudice of yours. When you say that my way of thinking is a "self-centered exercise in self-gratification, with only passing thought given to the effects of that action on another or others," it reflects this idea that for some reason, I don't give significant thought to the effects of my actions on others. Why would you think I'm shallow or don't care about others?

[Stone Mountain]

Well, then, what source(s) of morality do you look to? How do they compare with the Bible? Certainly that is a fair question, and a worthwhile exercise.

Well, one thing that almost all religions and beliefs systems have is some version of the Golden Rule - do unto others, etc, etc and this is about as close to a pan-religious/pan-mankind rule one can find. I believe that morality thoroughout the ages has flowed from the Golden Rule and rules like it.

See: http://www.fragrant.demon.co.uk/golden.html

Wouldn't it also be a fair statement to say that the morality which shows itself to be the highest one should be the one to be followed?

I'll buy that. Who gets to judge?

[Chemist_Geek]

Circumstances can make you celibate involuntarily, but the test is when circumstances do not prevent you from having the opportunity. It's a little thing called "character".

I will have been invcel (involuntarily celibate) for three years in August. I've been chaste since Decenber 2000. (Yes. There's an odd overlap.)

That is true, to a point. So are you saying that if there was a willing member of the other sex, you'd jump on it just because it's there? then you prove that you don't have self-control.

I had been chaste my whole life until after my engagement. However, when Dr. Jekyll turned into Ms. Hyde, I was glad to get out of there before the wedding with my skin intact. (Literally..!)

It was easy for me to be chaste, however, because apparently I am not an attractive man. So, I would consider a woman's willingness to have sex with me a great compliment. Those who have had a great deal of success (even in just asking the time) from the other sex will not understand that. Heck, I'm darn near ecstatic when one of my women friends acknowledges my existence...

Believe me, I know that it's slim pickings. There are an awful lot of truly messed up women out there, an awful lot who say they want a good man, but won't take him when they have him. Same way for women. Real men are few and far between.

I know now that women are not necessarily good people. *laugh* The first thing I'd probably think, once She (whoever She is) makes her interest clear, is "What is she trying to get out of me?"

In direct answer to your question, it depends. If (by some miracle) we had formed a romantic relationship with long-term prospects, then the temptation would be much greater to have sex were it offered. If, OTOH, there were no such future, it'd be a lot easier to just go home instead.

[LJPenney]

Yeah I passed--but that doesn't mean that I enjoyed it!

~L

[chasio649]

as soon as you come up for air and realize it's all a lie and you've been brainwashed.

[Lazamataz]

It was easy for me to be chaste, however, because apparently I am not an attractive man. So, I would consider a woman's willingness to have sex with me a great compliment. Those who have had a great deal of success (even in just asking the time) from the other sex will not understand that. Heck, I'm darn near ecstatic when one of my women friends acknowledges my existence..

Look, bud, it ain't about physical attractiveness all so much. I'm no stud muffin, let me tell you, but I have been paired with hotty after hotty most of my life. It's about who you are inside. Can you express yourself well? Do you have a willingness to spend quality companionship time with your mate, and are your activities engaging? And,(in the category of lessons recently learned) do you think of your partners well-being a lot? Can you be honest even about the petty shit?

Physical attractiveness is a factor that lasts about 4 months, I have observed. After that, no matter how amazing they look or how ugly they might be, they become -- simply -- Sue, or Jane, or Mary.

Same goes the other way. Your attractiveness won't matter in the long haul. Keep your head up high, and if you feel you are valuable, value yourself.

[Libertina]

If he's dating her for 6 months, doesn't know if he loves her, I think she was right to move on. Something seems odd here. For starters I'd say "control."

[Chemist_Geek]

Your attractiveness won't matter in the long haul.

As you say, physical attractiveness won't matter in the long run. I, however, didn't write physical attractiveness; I wrote merely "attractiveness."

Physical attractiveness does open doors. However, I'd like to think that a woman so shallow as to be turned on or off by mere appearances, wouldn't appeal to me.

Keep your head up high, and if you feel you are valuable, value yourself.

And, if all available experimental evidence - rejection after rejection, failure to even successfully begin relationships - supports the opposite hypothesis? What then am I to conclude? I am not valuable, because no one values me enough to love me. (I can't be a reliable judge of my own value; I'm biased!)

[BenR2]

as soon as you come up for air and realize it's all a lie and you've been brainwashed.

////////////////////
Brainwashed? Brainwashed? If believing in Christ as LORD and Saviour unto the salvation of my eternal soul from a richly deserved everlasting punishment in the Lake of Fire qualifies me as "brainwashed," then, yes -- I definitely AM brainwashed.

Brainwashed, indeed.

[nobdysfool]

I would never claim that my way is the only way, but it is working for myself and my partners. I believe I am happier and will be happier this way. You believe that you are and will be happier practicing abstinence until marriage. Different strokes, etc.

Do each of your "partners" know you're sharing yourself with others? Not that it matters to me, really. Obviously you've decided on an arrangement that you feel works for you, and even if you're all willing and informed, it still doesn't make it right. For you to say so is nothing but situational ethics. Saying that the situation determines its own morality is in effect saying tht there is no absolute standard of right and wrong. Our laws aren't based on that concept. If they were, there could not really be any laws. Think about it.

I am trying to point out to you, however, that when you call my attitude shallow and my relationships with women shallow, it is based purely on a prejudice of yours. When you say that my way of thinking is a "self-centered exercise in self-gratification, with only passing thought given to the effects of that action on another or others," it reflects this idea that for some reason, I don't give significant thought to the effects of my actions on others. Why would you think I'm shallow or don't care about others?

Call it a prejudice of mine if you want, but by the standard I am trying to uphold, your actions cause harm to others, whether you know it or not, or whether they admit it or not. You are using them for your own gratification, and they may very well be using you for the same reason. You have to allow for that possibility. It could all be an elaborate game, and even if all participants are willing, it's still a game. I'm speaking about that which I have learned through experience. I don't expect to change your mind, but I can't just act as if I agree with your choice, because I don't. And maybe you haven't considered this, but if you're bedding two or more females, you have made it that much harder for at least one other guy to find the woman that he could be happy with, and maybe even marry. Why? Because if she's involved with you, she's not really available for another guy. So, in effect you're hurting someone you don't even know, by preventing him from being able to meet and develop a relationship with one of your partners, because you're not content to have just one, you have to have more than one. Talk about selfish!

I said: Wouldn't it also be a fair statement to say that the morality which shows itself to be the highest one should be the one to be followed?

You said:I'll buy that. Who gets to judge?

What judge would you accept?

[chasio649]

yes...you certainly are!

[nobdysfool]

yes...you certainly are! (brainwashed)

You are, too....you just don't know it.

I'm brainwashed by the Word of God, and blood-washed by the Blood of His Son, Jesus.

[Artist]

"You are no freak. I salute your stand."

Thanks, sauropod. It was nice of you to say that.

[strela]

Incredible. 500-plus posts on a news story about a guy who doesn't want to have sex until he's ready to do so. How many posts would it be if the story was about a guy nailing every carbon-based life form with an XX chromosome pattern within a 5-mile radius?

[Stone Mountain]

Do each of your "partners" know you're sharing yourself with others?

Actually, I'm serially monogamous and have been for quite some time. I have never lied or omitted information about my dating practices to my partners.

Obviously you've decided on an arrangement that you feel works for you, and even if you're all willing and informed, it still doesn't make it right. For you to say so is nothing but situational ethics. Saying that the situation determines its own morality is in effect saying tht there is no absolute standard of right and wrong.

I don't believe that these statements are true. I believe that any of us should be allowed to decide what risks we choose to take for ourselves. I realize that many may disagree with me, but I believe that as free people, we should be allowed to decide what is and isn't best for oneself. Anyone that I impact by my decisions should also have the option of deciding if that is the best thing for them. Informed consent.

Our laws aren't based on that concept. If they were, there could not really be any laws. Think about it.

I have thought about it. This was my point in talking about the Golden Rule. This is a rule about morality that virtually every civilized society has agreed with. That, to me, is about as absolute as a standard as one can get.

Call it a prejudice of mine if you want, but by the standard I am trying to uphold, your actions cause harm to others, whether you know it or not, or whether they admit it or not. You are using them for your own gratification, and they may very well be using you for the same reason.

I believe that everyone should be allowed to take these risks as according to their own personal preference. I may be causing people harm; they may be causing me harm; we all know the risks and we choose to accept them.

And maybe you haven't considered this, but if you're bedding two or more females, you have made it that much harder for at least one other guy to find the woman that he could be happy with, and maybe even marry. Why? Because if she's involved with you, she's not really available for another guy. So, in effect you're hurting someone you don't even know, by preventing him from being able to meet and develop a relationship with one of your partners, because you're not content to have just one, you have to have more than one. Talk about selfish!

Well, I have almost never done anything like this in my life. I tend to be with one woman at a time. But, I don't buy this argument anyway. If I was sleeing with more than one woman, any of those women would be free to meet anyone they choose to. I certainly wouldn't hold those women to a higher standard than I would hold myself and certainly wouldn't prevent them from meeting and developing a relationship with someone else.

You still haven't explained why you think that any love I would have for a woman would be shallow. You said it isn't based on the fact that I have engaged in pre-marital sex. What is is based on?

Can you at least accept that you were wrong when you described my actions as a "self-centered exercise in self-gratification, with only passing thought given to the effects of that action on another or others." Whether or not you agree with my conclusions, you have to at least admit that I have given quite a bit of thought as to the effects of my actions on others. Just because I disagree with your conclusions doesn't mean that I haven't thought about it, right?

What judge would you accept [for morality]?

A difficult question. The fact that basically all civilizations have agreed on forms of the Golden Rule swayed me into believing that it was a good moral law. I'm not sure what else would off hand...

[Howlin]

How many posts would it be if the story was about a guy nailing every carbon-based life form with an XX chromosome pattern within a 5-mile radius?

Look here

[hchutch]

LOL!

Nice reponse...

[strela]

LOLOLOL ...

[Mr. Mojo]

Celibate until 33? The dude is either completely devoid of testosterone or he's a fruit. If you want to stay celibate until marriage, I can understand that. ....But if you're going be celibate and you're not married by the time you're 25, something's not kosher.