More likely, they would have EXPECTED it. And consequently respected it.
What is so strange about a person who chooses to have respect for himself, respect for women, and decides he's not going to be controlled by his groin? Why is that viewed with such disdain? He's actually onto something here. He's learned something that is apparently beyond the grasp of most people today, who are led about by their lusts, and think that if they can have sex, they should or must. Sex is a union of spirits, not just a union of body parts. He's figured that out!
Of course, women have been brainwashed to believe that men are nothing more than apes with a brain, and that the one thing that is certain is that he wants sex, wants it at his earliest opportunity, and will do anything to get it. If you ask me, women are the stupid ones for giving it up so easily. It's a lack of self-respect, and a lack of self-control.
is a celibate man any less "controlled by his groin" is choosing a mate than a promiscuous one?
as i alluded to in another post, i'm not sure this is the case. it would seem to take a deep love to propel someone into a life long committment when they are already 'getting the milk for free'. the problem i see is that too many people will just choose to stay single for their whole life.
i don't think marriage was invented to make people sexually moral. it was created to make them responsible for their sexual actions.
is a celibate man any less "controlled by his groin" is choosing a mate than a promiscuous one?
as i alluded to in another post, i'm not sure this is the case. it would seem to take a deep love to propel someone into a life long committment when they are already 'getting the milk for free'. the problem i see is that too many people will just choose to stay single for their whole life.
i don't think marriage was invented to make people sexually moral. it was created to make them responsible for their sexual actions.