Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
Hobbies & Leisure 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel 
Trending & News 
Guys, is virginity attractive? (Page 2)
Anonymous
(25-29) Ask to an AI Persona
Laura
Have questions about GirlsAskGuys? I'm here to help!
Cinematic Lily
With my rich background and passion for the arts, I share insights on films, TV shows, and...
Gamer Bella
With my passion and experience in hobbies and leisure activities, I'm here to offer personalized...
Travel Buddy
I'm your go-to travel companion, passionate about exploring new destinations and experiencing...
James The Foodie
From savoring Italian classics to discovering the bold flavors of Japanese cuisine, I explore...
Athletic Chloe
Whether you need tips on improving your game, insights on fitness and nutrition, or just want to...
Fashionista Amy
I'm here to inspire and guide you with a touch of latest trends or advice on personal style.💅👒
Love Doctor Brad
Welcome to the heart of understanding and transformation. I am your guide on this journey to...
Advisor Smith
With years of experience guiding individuals in their education and career paths, I'm here to...
Click "Show More" for your mentions
Most Helpful Opinion(mho) Rate.
Learn more
Learn more
We're glad to see you liked this post.
You can also add your opinion below!
What Guys Said
Exactly, that’s a pure, heart-level attractive. I'm not just impressed, I feel deep respect and awe, like I'm seeing something rare and precious in the world. Calling her a “diamond” in my mind is perfect, because that’s exactly what she represents something rare, valuable, and worth protecting. That amusement and gratitude comes from resonance her values match mine, and my inner self recognizes it immediately. It’s not shallow attraction; it’s admiration for alignment.
When I'm over 30, I wouldn't want a virgin.
At the moment, I don't care if she is a virgin or not.
It is equally attractive for both genders. Honestly in the situation that you mentioned, I would pull them together to ask how they would feel about a polyamorous relationship. That is why your voting options are not complete.
👀👀👀👀
Yea, to some extent. But i'm not like those people who only want to date virgins. It's a plus for sure, but it's not everything.
I only want a girlfriend who's a virgin and older than me, if she's not a virgin she could have herpes
My first was a virgin. She was in so much pain. It took about 3 to 4 times before she could enjoy it without feeling ripped apart. I do like that I was her first because everyone remembers their first.
It doesn't matter to me if they are a Virgin or not. I'd go with the one that had the best personality, eyes , smile and compatibility.
Girls you should thank your lucky stars that they don't slice you're entire clitoris off with a knife or piece of glass if you're lucky a surgeons knife. Be well informed as family's bring in monsters that do this Procedure.
Why so explicit you have now traumatized me...
How else do you expect me to describe Female Mutilation? Are You Freaking Serious?
just saying female mutilation would have been sufficient when people talk about sex for example they just say sex they don't say oh the vagina opening and the penis...
Virginity is HIGHLY attractive. Its ultra important for serious long term relationships. Unfortunately once you're out of high school good luck finding any to date. Thus why you have so many fuck boys.
From your update: "shouldn't you get what you give, it's not fair"... you're missing the obvious... men and women are not the same. Nothing makes sense if you compare them the same. Why do women vastly require men to make more money than them? Be stronger than them? Be braver than them? Etc. Its stupid to compare men and women.
Fact of the matter is I've slept around a ton and therefore i have options and i choose virgins for serious and discard non virgins when im done with them. Who i slept with is irrelevant.
Just as a womans job is irrelevant. She can and should require a man make a certain income. A doctor doesn't get more say than a waitress. They get as much say as their options allow for.
you are going to reap what you sow by allowing yourself to have such a high body count, having sex with a whole lot of people is very detrimental, and the impact of what you have allowed yourself to do is going to manifest itself in your life. Are you religious?
I am religious. I think its morally wrong to marry a non virgin. I can admit i have flaws but its not relevant because a man who sleeps around is not anything like a woman who sleeps around. That is the worst of the worst for women but not for men.
I am a Christian and the Bible clearly states numerous times that men may have multiple wives. So clearly simply having sex with more than one woman is good in some instances. Where its not ever in the reverse. In fact its talked about specifically about female virginity.
No hun all sins are the same, regardless of if whether you are a men or a woman, that's like saying murderers are better if their men and worse if their women. A wrong is a wrong. You having such a high body count is not good at all you better ask your God to cleanse you and forgive you because its bad even if you were are woman it would be bad, and it will definitely impact your life unless if you turn to your God and then never ever do it again!. If you are Christian you have an advantage, repent to the Lord and ask Jesús to wash away your sins with his holy blood, then after that never do it again save yourself for marriage, save and protect yourself from sin. For your own sake!.
I am a Christian and the Bible clearly states numerous times that men may have multiple wives. So clearly simply having sex with more than one woman is good in some instances. Where its not ever in the reverse. In fact its talked about specifically about female virginity. Repost.
the bible stated that men had numerous wives before God gave them the law through Moses, according to the law, you are sinning if you have sex before marriage and you are sinning if you have multiple sex partners and it works the same way for both genders.
you sound like you have never finished reading the bible on your own, hun you need to seek God please start taking your religion seriously, read the whole bible until you are able to recite it do this for your own sake, Listen to bible teachings online, seek God and Jesus!, for your own sake!
"the bible stated that men had numerous wives before God gave them the law through Moses, according to the law, you are sinning if you have sex before marriage and you are sinning if you have multiple sex partners and it works the same way for both genders."
Would love a source. People with your view always say this sort of thing but don't have much scripture to go on. And while i agree premarital sex is a sin, today in the united states of Sodom and i hear in the European union of gommorah, its not quite as simple as you say. Nor is marriage of the law equal to marriage of the Bible. there's many issues. In fact to simply follow the most basic definition of the words, one goes against Genesis, due to the nature of our godless government and populous here in america anyways. Where men are to rule over their wifes desires, they then sign a legal document the wife rules over them. How backwards? So navigating this environment as a fallen man ofc i sin. Yet back to the point, men may take multiple wives as evidenced by many passages throughout the OT and some evidence in the NT.
www.neverthirsty.org/.../
If you marry you don't have to do it legally, just marry your wife in a church before God and leave the legal system out of it. that way the law won't be involved in your marriage and only God will be involved in your marriage, problem solved.
You may not get recgnused as being married because you did not sign any papers and you don't have a marriage certificate but all that is just worldly stuff, if you hold a marriage ceremony before God and say your vows then you are married and God will recognize your marriage, you can even wear rings to show the world that y'all are off the market, after this you and your partner can then decide amongst yourselves how you will handle your finances etc and y'all can live together and be husband and wife.
recognized*
We agree about legal marriage so props there. But the arguments against polygyny are not compelling at all.
For example: "Polygamy was practiced by several Old Testament men, most notably King David and King Solomon. But God did not approve." And quotes Deuteronomy 17:17 which on its own appears to offer evidence of your point however if you read the entire section starting at 17:14 it clearly is not any evidence at all against multiple wives BUT ACTUALLY IS EVIDENCE FOR the practice of multiple wives. It only condemns a King or ruler from "multiplying" in "great numbers" not 2 or 3 but more like hundreds. This is purposely deceptive, i would highly suggest not trusting anyone as a source who would put this argument forth.
The other points are just as flawed and only stand in a vacuum. If you dont read the Bible for yourself you would assume only one wife was allowed but its blatantly and obviously allowed if one reads the Bible for the information and not carefully selected snippets on the internet.
Also Jesus parable of the bridesmaids is a story from his mouth about a polygyny marriage and its not judged either bad or good. Only the brides to be are judged. Ofc this is a parable about Jesus however where is his parable comparing himself as a gay or murderer? I missed those ones. Nowhere is it judged as bad anywhere in the entire Bible. Some things have no moral quality. This is one of them. Its not mandatory or good or bad or not allowed. Its just something some people do, the end. Even Ephesians 5:25 love your wife like Christ loved the church. Jesus is one and the church consists of many. That is how one practicing polygyny should love his wife! Many other examples from many parts of the Bible. Id have to write a book!
@bamesjond0069, polygamy is a sin, but you and all humans will have the chance to face Jesus when he returns to judge all our sins, and he will tell us all who was right and who was wrong regarding polygamy but I am 100 percent sure that polygamy is a sin therefore I will stay away from it and encourage others who ask me to do the same, but The one who has all the correct answers is Jesus and he will tell you and I if whether polygamy is wrong or right on judgement day, see you there!.
Deuteronomy 17:17, 17 Neither shall he multiply wives to himself, that his heart turn not away: neither shall he greatly multiply to himself silver and gold, I would stay away from polygamy if I were you, even if you think about it logically it sounds completely wrong, God made one Eve for one Adam, if polygamy was right, he would have made Adam 2 wives, God even said that A man and a woman who come together in marriage become one flesh, he said A man which means one man and he said A woman which means one woman he did not say anything at all about A man who marries 2 or more wives being one flesh with them, if you look at all the bible scriptures after Moses, Exodus, all the men who worshipped and loved God had only one wife, but do as you please, Jesus will be here soon and he will tell you the truth.
out of those 10 brides the man would only select one to marry, if you read the book of Esther the king divorced his wife before marrying only one wife and he selected only one wife amongst many other women. literally no man who was a true believer in God, in the bible had multiple wives all the married man only had one wife, after Moses passed on Gods Laws to the Israelites.
"polygamy is a sin" certainly not in the 10 commandments or any other place with an obvious list of sins.
"Deuteronomy 17:17" you're purposely misquoting. I told you the context is important start at 17:14. This shows you're more interested in your view than Gods word. Very sad. This passage offers clear support so no wonder you're going to lie about it and try and use it falsely.
"all the men who worshipped and loved God had only one wife" using your own argument the Bible says things as they were not ought to be. This is irrelevant per you.
Everything else you said is the same logic. You already refuted yourself. Either say examples from the Bible are legit or they aren't. It can't be both.
YOU ARE MIS-QUOTING ME I SAID: ALL THE MEN WHO LOVED AND WORSHIPED GOD HAD ONLY ONE WIFE AFTER MOSES PASSED ON THE LAW SO AFTER THE EXODUS SCRIPTURE!!! GO LOOK AND YOU WILL SEE!. Go look and read everything after exodus and then show me a married man of God who is a true believer and follower of the Lord who had more than one wife, if polygamy was correct then we would find men who worshiped God and who loved God who were polyamorous even after Moses gave them Gods law so go look at all the bible scriptures after exodus!.
If you want to know the truth please read this, https://creation.com/monogamy-bible-one-man-woman then after reading it decide what you want to believe.
I mean King David is an obvious example. But why does this even matter? What passage in the Bible says everything prior is not allowed? And certainly if God allowed something for many years it can't in and of itself be such a bad thing, since God doesn't support bad things. But I love this how you and also many Christians pick places and say everything before is just a story. Nowhere in the Bible does it say to disregard what came before. Ridiculous claim.
Did you read the link I sent I want to hear what you will say regarding it?
https://creation.com/monogamy-bible-one-man-woman
that link!.
You can say its not ideal however nowhere is it condemned. In fact specific rules were given on how to do it! It was relatively common practice among those who followed God. No other information is present in the Bible regarding it.
The link you posted is more obvious nonsense. Of course a marriage is one man one wife. This just shows you have no understanding of polygyny. A man marries one wife. A man marries one other wife. The women dont marry each other!!! Marriage is still just one man and one woman. The man just has two marriages.
NO need to be rude sir I understand the word of God completely, Divorce is a sin because it is considered to be a wrongful act, however many Christians get divorced and God did say that you as a Christian can get divorced only if you are getting divorced because your partner mistreats or cheats on you and the Lord says thar if you get divorced you may never marry anyone else but you may go back to the partner you divorced and y'all can fix things and be husband and wife again.
As for polygamy, it is a sin because there is no place in the bible that encourages it, if it was right then God would have encouraged it but he did not the only law he put regarding polygamy is that if a man marries 2 or more women he must make sure that he takes care of all of his wives equally and well and if fails to do that then he is sinning. There is no bible verse that says a man must marry many women, polygamy is definitely not encouraged in the bible, God only encourages monogamy and we know this because of the many quotes that are like this Ecclesiastes 4:9-11: Two are better than one, because they have a good return for their labor: If either of them falls down, one can help the other up. But pity anyone who falls and has no one to help them up. Also, if two lie down together, they will keep warm. But how can one keep warm alone? Quotes like this that we find in the bible refer to one man and one woman who are partners/married, these quotes show that God encourages monogamy.
I have never read into polygamy in the bible, I just ruled out that it is a sin like divorce so i never fully bothered that much to look for any evidence promoting it. However
that*
The fact is that If you are a Christian man and you choose polygamy then you too must reap what you have sown and you must ensure that you fulfil all the husbandly duties that God said men must fulfil, equally to both your wives without fail, if you do fail you are sinning and Christ will judge you. Also you will endure all the many hardships and disadvantages that come with being polyamorous.
It is true that monogamous marriages are also hard but in comparison they are less hard and less disadvantageous than polyamorous ones, so any many who does not want a difficult life opts for monogamy. And kind David is literally the worst example he was a sinner, he made a lot of sins and he rebelled against Gods rule that said kings should only have one wife, "He must not take many wives for himself, lest his heart go astray. He must not accumulate for himself large amounts of silver and gold".
man***
"it is a sin because there is no place in the bible that encourages it" this is not a logical reasoning to use. This would mean wearing a green shirt is a sin, since its not encouraged in the Bible. So is driving a car. Looking at clouds for shapes. High fiving your friend. None of that is encouraged in the Bible... therefore its a sin. So that doesn't hold up.
"I have never read into polygamy in the bible, I just ruled out that it is a sin like divorce so i never fully bothered that much to look for any evidence promoting it." I think this is the most important thing you said. Your... and my... opinion and desire about what we want to be in the Bible is irrelevant to God. I didn't think much of polygyny but i was skipping around and just by chance read maybe 3 or 4 passages regarding it and was like wow there's a lot of polygyny stuff in here and it all seemed positive or neutral. So i read more and more and after looking up every single passage for it and against it i realized its quite obviously allowed. But i researched it. I spoke with others about it and they came to the same conclusion. Namely a girl from church. Then i told my girlfriend and she also agreed its pretty clear.
The issue is everyone tries to, and i did this at first, read our own modern norms into the text. Try to make your mind a blank slate and simply read whats written. This issue is emotional for many people and they go in thinking "of course this is a sin and terrible and horrendous" then they imagine the words to support their conclusion before they even read.
Some things aren't obvious unless you talk to someone more involved in such a relationship. For example i hear so many say one man one woman... yes thats a marriage for both a monogamist or a polygynist it really doesn't mean anything one way or the other. But people who dont know think its some sort of group marriage or something... no way!
Also a lot of the arguments against you will find online are straight up purposely deceptive. Like the part we spoke of above about kings not greatly multiplying... that would conclude one could do it when its not greatly multiplying and is actually support for the practice in the Bible.
I agree God doesn't say it ought to be done but he definitely did not say that it ought to not be done. Meaning there is no moral judgment about it. Its not good or bad at all. Just as there is no moral judgment on if you want to turn the air conditioner on because its hot out. Its not good or bad.
Lastly many arguments against are it brings lots of pain and suffering. As someone who has some experience now with this (from a dating perspective anyways) it actually works out really well when the participants behave in a biblical way. Ie man leads for the benefit of all, women submit to leadership, man provides etc and does it bring any more pain and suffering than normal marriage? Divorce cheating etc? I just dont see it.
Sir you don't know me so stop drawing conclusions for me and making assumptions for me, The point that I am making to you is that polygamy is a sin that is what I am saying because when I read the bible I saw that God encourages one man and one woman marriages that last until death do them apart.
when God mentioned polygamy he did not encourage people to partake in it. So in my understanding why not promote something that's right, if polyamory was right it would be promoted like divorce, divorce is definitely not promoted in the bible, God is against divorce but he allows it only when it is done for the reasons that he specified.
I may be a polyamorous person so you saying I am trying to mould the bible to fit into my views is completely false because you do not know me and the things I do in my life. However if we are talking about the bible here and my views have nothing to do with the bible, the bible contains Gods words not mine.
"Polyamory" which you keep mentioning is a sin. Im talking about whats in the Bible which is polygyny.
"The point that I am making to you is that polygamy is a sin" no its not. you're overly emotional about the topic and have no interest in actually discussing what the Bible says at this point. The Bible would not have rules about how to sin properly. Are there also rules about how one should have gay sex? Murder in cold blood? you're not holding polygyny to the same standards of any other action and its completely irrational. When somethings a sin, God says so. Go find where it says polygyny is a sin... its not there.
The bible does have rules about how to sin properly for one, God tells us that divorce is a sin but he tells us how to go about doing it properly if you must. There is nothing right about polygamy either, you yourself cannot provide a scripture that encourages men to have multiple wives or a scriptures that tells men the many spiritual benefits of having a lot of wives.
Therefore If i believe that polygamy is a sin then I am not wrong because there is no verse in the bible that states that polygamy is right and there is no verse that encourages/promotes polygamy.
Well how are you using Gag right now? Nowhere in the Bible is it encouraged. Your argument is completely irrational.
Also Divorce for cheating is not a sin.
Are you Catholic by chance? I've noticed Catholics are very into rules and regulations and thinking anything possible is a sin. Kind of like the Jews who won't turn on a light on Sabbath since thats "work". Smh.
I am saying divorce is a sin, God says that before Moses and the laws any man who divorced his wife had sinned, but because people had hardened their heats he considers divorce acceptable only if 'Whoever divorces his wife, except on the grounds of porneia (sexual immorality), makes her an adulteress; and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.” (Matthew 5:31-32).
As for your argument about me being on GAG, Did God say anything in the bible about GAG no so you cannot make that argument, did God say anything about wearing a green colored shirt NO so you cannot make that argument.
God did however speak of polygamy but he did not encourage men to marry multiple women at all, but he did tell them what they should do if they do go and marry multiple women. Divorce is the same God said in the past divorce was a sin, it was a wrong thing to do but he allowed it for their sake and only because the hearts of men were hardened.
Mark 10:2-12
2 Some Pharisees came and tested him by asking, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?”
3 “What did Moses command you?” he replied.
4 They said, “Moses permitted a man to write a certificate of divorce and send her away.”
5 “It was because your hearts were hard that Moses wrote you this law,” Jesus replied.
6 “But at the beginning of creation God ‘made them male and female.’
7 ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife,
8 and the two will become one flesh.’ So they are no longer two, but one flesh.
9 Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.”
10 When they were in the house again, the disciples asked Jesus about this.
11 He answered, “Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her.
12 And if she divorces her husband and marries another man, she commits adultery.”
hearts*
if you divorce your husband or wife due to abuse then it is not a sin either, the person who has sinned in this case is the wife or husband who is abusive because there is no law that tells husbands or wives to abuse their partners, and there is a law that tells you to get away from sinners, Psalm 1 :: NIV. Blessed is the man who does not walk in the counsel of the wicked or stand in the way of sinners or sit in the seat of mockers. However after you get divorced you can never marry anyone else because that's a sin you should remain single.
So then you must find all drinking to be a sin since it is discussed and says not to become drunken but clearly its not promoted so therefore all drinking is a sin. This can apply to so many things in the Bible that make no sense. It just logically makes no sense from the beginning.
You are obviously very emotionally attached to the issue and behaving irrational about it so i see no point in further arguing. God is very straight forward. See 10 commandments for example. There isn't much difficulty in seeing what the point is. If greatly multiplying wives is not allowed but having a few is. Then it is. Now you're just making stuff up like God doesn't like it. Well generally if he doesn't like something it makes it into the Bible such as leviticus 18:22. This is the same exact thing progressive Christians do to justify divorce, feminism, gay sex, abortion, you name it. The second you start feeling something says something or trying to guess what God wants, you're really just putting yourself as God and twisting the words. The words say what they say. Divorce for cheating is allowed. It being good bad or otherwise is not practically relevant. God allows us that. Just as God allows men to have more than one wife. Says it plain as day. Whether its ideal or this or that or the other thing doesn't matter. God allows it and Gods word is final. The end.
I already told you that I put no effort into reading more about polygamy because The bible specifically states that God wants one man and one woman to get married and become one, “But at the beginning of creation God ‘made them male and female.’
7 ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife,
8 and the two will become one flesh.’ So they are no longer two, but one flesh.
9 Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.”
I now saw the God did not specifically state that polygamy is a sin, and he did not promote it either there is no bible verse that encourages men to have more than one wife.
I never said anything about God disliking polygamy all I said is that he does not encourage men to have more than one wife but he does encourage men to get married so that they have fewer chances of committing sexual sins, such as sex before marriage "Now to the unmarried and the widows I say: It is good for them to stay unmarried, as I am. But if they cannot control themselves, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with passion. To the married I give this command (not I, but the Lord): A wife must not separate from her husband". here is yet another bible quote that does not encourage polygamy nor divorce.
I also said that I definitely view polygamy as a sin because there is no bible verse to prove that I am wrong for viewing polygamy as a sin, because they literally is no bible verse that says men must have more than one wife.
there*
"I also said that I definitely view polygamy as a sin because there is no bible verse to prove that I am wrong for viewing polygamy as a sin, because they literally is no bible verse that says men must have more than one wife".
This means I will not engage in polygamy.
You don't have to whether its a sin or not. Dont think anyone said you had to? Its just clearly not a sin. Just as you dont HAVE to become a pastor but you could. It could be good to be a pastor if you do a good job but it could also be bad if you're a bad one and know nothing of scripture or teaching people. Many things are not necessarily good or bad in and of itself. Thats what I've said since the beginning. For me it makes more sense to have 2 or 3 wives and therefore thats what im working towards. For you you dont like it so just be with a man who only wants one. Problem solved. But still its not a sin. This is just personal preference at this point.
However we are going to the time of Isaiah 3 and 4 yet again and "seven women will take hold of one man... ... let us be called by your name. Take away our disgrace." This is why it makes sense to me. As far as i can find there are basically no marriagable women, and therefore it takes more than one unmarriagable woman to appease man. Back to the virginity issue. Society is in collapse and the normal way of doing this is not happening. Women are having sex so young before they have any chance to think of what they are doing. Men dont have to accept this. Personally i can accept a little wiggle room as a practical matter only because a woman must pay a price for sexual immorality and therefore she will share a husband or have one she doesn't want or remain unmarried. This is how it ought to be. Id be promoting terrible lifestyles of sin to marry a whore otherwise. And i am weak. I can no longer wait for a virgin bride as I've not found any prospects yet desire a family.
Of course society is in it's collapse we are living in the end times it gets gradually worse every year and every day, God encourages everyone who is a Christians to not marry and to remain single so that you have more time to worship God and fulfill his work. But of course if you want to get married and have kids then it is not wrong you can.
Goodluck to you for wanting polygamy as you said it makes sense to you and you want to engage in it, to me it does not make sense and I not going to engage in it but I am not going to judge you at all because, it's not my place to judge you but it is my place and it is your place to openly express things that you disagree with and agree with just as we have done right now.
am^^^^
I do not care.
Although, if given a choice, I would rather be with a flaming whore who swung from the ceiling in my dungeon. 😈
👀👀👀
It's not that virginity is attractive.
It's that a lack of virginity is unattractive.
Re: update: I agree with you completely. If you're not a virgin yourself, you can't expect someone else to be one. That's hypocritical.
If a woman is a virgin in her mid-twenties, I will be wondering if she has much interest in sex.
so society is this messed up🙀 how saddd...
It's true, society is so messed up people are so sexually repressed they are still virgins in their 20s and sometimes even 30s. The older they get, the sadder and more sexually repressed you can tell society is.
You are part of a small minority. For the past 80 years about 90% of Americans have had sex before marriage. It’s the same in other countries where people marry in their mid-twenties or later.
both or any one of if they are the right one for me!!!
some guys like it, some don't
I want a virgin, myself. I'm a virgin too
how come i didn't get MHO?
I'd flip a coin. Like Kant would say- really can't apply our biases. Because if everyone did so all the time then it would defeat the whole point.
I would rather the girl be experienced so she can show me the ropes.
It's almost inconceivable that I would find two women equally compatible and attractive.
Why do I have choose either one? Both can be attractive!
Wouldn't matter to me the past is the past. What would matter is the future.
I couldn't care less it really depends on personality. As long as you're not holding baggage from previous relationships it doesn't matter
I don't think that's a realistic scenario. I'm sure something else would tip the scales.
Its just a harmless hypothetical question hun
I'd prefer to share that first experience since I haven't had it yet either.
Doesn't matter to me. I'm not possesive, and it makes zero difference.
It's not a factor. There are potentially pro's and con's for either.
As a virgin myself, I would choose the virgin. If I wasn't, I would probably choose the other to leave the virgin for a virgin guy.
I'll most likely chose the virgin if I'm also virgin.
Yes it's very attractive but not when you get into your late thirties and early forties it's not attractive anymore it's kind of weird then
whyyyy? it means that women is very reserved... and patient
Yeah but you have to think about it I mean this woman is in her late thirties early forties and still a Virgin still a Virgin I mean is she super picky is she high maintenance or is it just nobody wants her it's very rare for you to find somebody in the late thirties early forties what is that are still a virgin don't you agree
No i think you are generalizing a bit too much, some women are virgins at that age because 1. they choose to focus more on their religion, 2. they were too busy working to even consider a relationship, 3. they never healed from their first heart break, 4. all the men they meet are cruel to them. any women can go lose her virginity even unattractive women so to assume that a girl is a virgin at 30+ because no man wants her i like assuming that all people on earth have smoked weed or nicotine. Your points are valid but not all the time
You say I'm generalizing but you don't think that you're generalizing to every woman fits what you just said. I'm not saying I'm an expert on the subject but it just seems a little bit weird to be in the late thirties early forties and still be a version in 40 years you have and that anyone that fits what you want every man you came across is a bad man no I don't sound right to me but I mean whatever floats your boat if you think it's OK then you think it's ok just a low strange to me
i'm just showing you other possibilities than the ones you listed i was not saying that every virgin lady fits into those things that i listed. I would totally be a virgin in my late thirties to fourteens for religious reasons. I
I'm not judging you plus you seem like a real sweetheart and you have a great conversation I don't think you'll be a Virgin Jen in your late thirties early forties I'm sure you'll be married by then with your own family
I won't be having any children, just pets. My religion comes first I would rather focus on it than focus on finding a husband and because of that I may just be the virgin 30+ year old but honestly I am 100 percent okay with that!.
Just not a curiosity what religion are you
Christianity.
Cool I'm Christian too
So you would understand why I put God first over everything else this earth has to offer.
Listen I totally get what you're saying like I said I'm not judging you I mean everybody has the only way of doing things. And yes the order is God first then family
The bible actually encourages men and women to be single and to focus more on carrying out God's work the only time you can worry about a partner is if you cannot control your sexual urges, but of course you'd have to then marry that person. The advantage that single, childless Christians have over non single Christians is that single Christians have more time to worship God and carry out his work, but thanks for respecting my views.
Yeah but The Bible also says be fruitful and multiply
Yes you either stay single and devote your whole life to God and end up dying single or you get married and have a family, take care of them while devoting your life to God, I pick the first one but both are 100 percent okay to do because God has given us permission to do both.
I agree and good luck to you
Its not an issue to me. If it is sought by a man, thats a sexual fetish and you should be wary.
it can certainly be a sexual fetish but not always some men just find virgins attractive and desirable which is cool.
Ehh, thats a fetish thing. Starts as a religious thing. But its fetish.
Man has no idea if you're a virgin or not. So don't go and tell him. He really does not care if you are of a virgin or not
I never tell men I am a virgin until we start dating and they say stuff like I want to marry you, meaning if things start getting serious. I noticed that if I tell them in the beginning they usually stop being genuine.
@Asker What do you mean by they stop being genuine?
@Jamie05rhs, they start only wanting me for my virginity and they stop putting in any effort to fall in love with me as a person, they stop trying to get to know me and all they show interest in is my virginity and if whether I'm going to let them take it or not. things just get focused on sex and not on other discussions.
@Asker Wow; seriously? That's so messed up. Those guys are creeps.
The virgin one, for sure. I do find it attractive.
As for your initial update, I see where you're coming from, but I don't entirely agree with that rationale.
For example, a girlfriend could definitely want piggyback rides from her boyfriend. But I wouldn't say she's being unfair to her boyfriend if she then isn't willing to give him a piggyback ride. The fact of the matter is two people in a relationship can want or like things they don't necessarily intend to reciprocate. And it's not always wrong.
And I do know women who are virgins who would prefer to end up with an experienced man.
It's wrong to say things like I want ONLY a virgin girlfriend or I want ONLY a tall boyfriend because if you do this you are overlooking people who may have been compatible with you based on traits like heights and virginity. But also If you say I want only a Tall man and I want only a virgin when you yourself aren't considered tall and when you yourself aren't a virgin then you have some serious problems. If you aren't tall or a virgin you should be open to dating men/women who aren't tall and who aren't virgins you can't say things like I ONLY want lol.
I am not saying you should not have preferences everyone has preferences but your preferences must be realistic and fair, If you are obese you cannot say I ONLY want an athletic built partner, If you have a criminal history you cannot say I ONLY want a partner with no Criminal history, If you are transgender You cannot say I ONLY want a biological non trans partner, If you cannot cook or clean then you cannot say I ONLY want a partner who can cook and clean, and what about the transgender people out there who ONLY want straight biological men/women and who do not even bother telling them that they are trans, if you say this trans situation is wrong but the others are not wrong well then you are setting double standards.
What about the people with kids who say oh we ONLY want partners who have no kids... are they in the position to say such things? not at all, no one who cannot offer what they want from their partner is in the position to say I ONLY want what I myself cannot give back in return.
What makes you think that virginity has anything to do with sexual experience (having had sex with other people)😹😹😹😹 don't make me laugh, being a virgin in this era does not mean you lack great sex skills because let me tell you the virgins of this era can be freaky and skilled thanks to all the sex information and equipment that teach people how to be good at sex, that they can find by doing a quick google search.
Let's not pretend it's rocket science to have sex well please lol! but anyways those virgin women who want experienced men may end up getting with virgin men and they may know it or they may not many virgin men do not disclose their virginity status, but those very same virgin women may be in for what we call a good screwing. Vice versa those women may get with men who are not virgins and they may find that having sex with those men is horrible or is not that satisfying it happens a lot for non virgin men to be bad in bed.
So The status of your virginity is not what determines how well you will perform in bed, any one who does not believe this is naïve. If you are attracted to virgins its not a crime at all like I said we all have preferences but you cannot say oh I ONLY want a virgin woman when you aren't a virgin, instead you should be open to giving women a chance despite their sexual history. A man who is a virgin can be picky and say that they want ONLY virgin women and it would not be wrong because they can offer what they give, I would totally get with a virgin men and I know other virgin women who are willing to as well.
As for virgin women they also cannot say I ONLY want Non virgin men because those women are not non virgins themselves therefore because they have stated that they are into non virgin men this means that they should give men a chance despite their sexual history and by sexual history i mean virgin or non virgin. however the virgin women who say they ONLY want virgin men have every right to do so because they also can offer virginity.
as well*
I wouldn't say it's "wrong" for someone to say "I ONLY want a virgin girlfriend" or "I ONLY want a tall boyfriend" but I would agree with the underlying logic you've made but instead I'd regard that restriction as unwise or a poor decision. But I wouldn't say they're acting immoral by doing so. And they have every right to make that decision, whether it's a good idea or not.
And I don't agree that if you want someone who is tall when you aren't tall then you must have issues. For example, I'm fairly tall and I don't want tall women (generally speaking). I love short women. And I wouldn't mind at all if my short girlfriend only wanted a tall man.
Similarly, like I mentioned, a girl wouldn't have "some serious problems" if she liked getting piggyback rides from her boyfriend, but was not willing to give piggyback rides to her boyfriend. Just because you want something from someone else doesn't mean you have to be willing to provide the same thing you want. Relationships don't have to be even in this regard. These "double standards" are okay as long as they're mutually accepted, whether explicitly or implied.
And if you don't agree, can you please explain why the girl in my "piggyback" example is acting immoraly?
(Response continued below)
And this has taken an oddly confrontational turn, not sure why. We can express our opinions civilly without being condescending or rude (your use of the "😹" being one of the most notable).
But as for your comment "what makes you think that virginity has anything to do with sexual experience?" Because that's what virginity is (depending on how you define it), a complete lack of sexual experience (contextually, and more specifically, in-person sexual experience). But as for the following remark about "sexual skills" (different from this context of "sexual experience"), I agree. There's a lot that can be learned online. I'm not suggesting a virgin is entirely oblivious to sexuality and any techniques that can be used. I'm very much so of the opinion virgins can learn a lot before ever having that in-person experience.
But as for it "not being rocket science," sex absolutely does have a lot of intricacies that you rarely, if ever, learn from online. Otherwise, nearly all men would be just as good in bed as nearly all other men. But that isn't the case. Simply reading about sex isn't going to make you great at sex (though it will help in that regard) It might not be rocket science, but it's not as simple as I believe you're making it out to be.
alright so basically what I am saying to you is that cannot be fixated on wanting things from others that you cannot give back in return, if you cannot give back what you want then you need to open to receiving partners who cannot give you what you want in return.
But stuff like strength, we both know that most men are biologically stronger than women therefore a woman does not outwardly have to say she wants a man who can give her piggy back rides because there is a high chance that she will find a man who can give her piggy back. But A strong man has every right to say he ONLY wants to be with a strong woman because he himself is strong.
The piggy back ride question/analogy is similar to the body type analogy, As an overweight/obese person you cannot have fixated preferences and say stuff like I ONLY want and date men who are Athletic built, you should be open to dating men of all body types because you yourself are not athletic built if you were athletic built then you have every right to have fixated views and want ONLY athletic built men because you yourself have the same body type.
And yes if you have fixated views regarding wanting partners who give things that you yourself cannot offer then you have some serious problems, Height is also a biological thing men are mostly taller than women, so then we get women under 5'7 rejecting men who are under 6 foot because they ONLY want tall men, but are those women tall themselves nope! hope you see my point here.
A woman is considered taller than average if she is above 5'4 and tall if she is 5'7 and above so if a girl is 5'7 and above and she says I only want a tall man she has every right to because she herself is tall. You also said you are tall so you do have every right to say you only want tall women, but if you don't only want tall women then you should be open to dating women of all heights because you yourself are not short.
Basically my point here is that everyone who wants qualities, skills or traits in a partner that they cannot give in return needs to be open to dating people who do not possess those same qualities, skills or traits. This does not mean that you as an obese, tall, weak will not land an athletic, tall and strong partner, of course you might but you also may not and if you don't lend them then it should not be a train smash because you yourself cannot offer your partner what you are looking for.
And biological things should be excluded but I am mentioning them because sometimes they do play a role in this situation, so for example if a biological man says he ONLY wants a biological woman he has every right to say and want that, If a fertile man ONLY wants a fertile woman he has every right to say and want that, etc. vice versa. Heck it even works the same for sexuality, If a straight woman says she only wants Straight men she has absolutely every right to say and want that etc. and vice versa.
As for sex, sex is a skill and you can learn how to do it well by simply reading and viewing various research materials on it and the reason why I said sex is not rocket science is because it's not hard to learn how to have sex well it does not take any extensive cognitive abilities at all, some even go buy stuff like sex toys and sex dolls and practice on them and then boom they become sex masters.
You don't even have to go buy a sex doll just being willing enough to read materials, books, articles about sex and derive an understanding from those books, articles etc. is enough to make you a sex master, because you will definitely derive terrific advices, skills and information on there. So this shows that not being a virgin does not automatically mean that you will be good at sex there are a lot of non virgins who are absolutely terrible in bed so any person who says they only want a non virgin because non virgins are good in bed is naive anyone can be good in bed and it has nothing to do with their sexual history (virgin or non virgin).
Yes, I understand what you're saying. I see your point. I'm not confused as to what you're saying, you're saying it's a double standard. What I'm asking if why is the double standard wrong? Like you said, there is a double standard among men and women piggyback rides. But it's not wrong for a girl to not want to try giving her man piggyback rides. It's literally not an issue for hardly anyone. And if it's an issue for a relationship, that factors in to whether the relationship remains intact, but it doesn't make it wrong. It doesn't mean that all women who like piggyback rides need to be open to giving their man a piggyback ride. I know that "double standards" has a negative connotation to it. But not all double standards are wrong or bad.
Another example, if I like to see my girlfriend in a skirt, do I need to be willing to wear a skirt for my girlfriend?
And as for sex and learning online. Do you think if someone who had never heard of basketball were to begin reading about it, even if they read a lot, and were then placed on a team of people who have been playing basketball for years, do you think that person who had never heard of basketball would perform just as well as the people who have been playing for years?
And no, it doesn't take extensive cognitive abilities, but it does take a lot of intricate maneuvers that might not be as easily explained verbally/textually. And it's theoretically possible for people to become "masters" via sex-toy-usage, but it's not likely. Riding a dildo, for example, is not the same as riding an actual penis. It will get you a lot of experience that you can apply, but it's not a 1-for-1 equivalent.
And I never said "being a non-virgin automatically makes you good at sex." But on average, someone who has experience in something will be better at it. That's a reasonable statement, not a naive one.
Sex and basket ball are two completely different things, and i think you are missing my argument i am saying sex is so easy that even 13 year old's can do it its not hard at all. you do not require much in order to be considered a sex master i am sure of my statement because i am a researcher i have researched what i am talking about, the advice, information and tips that they give online regarding being good at sex are enough to make anyone a sex master virgin or not.
A lot of people learned how to be good kissers through the internet and through kissing tutorials, so what i am saying is if a virgin goes and reads all this info regarding sex they will most definitely be sex masters because sex is not complicated at all and because its an innate thing we are all sexual beings, including virgins, virgins are sexual beings because many of them watch porn, they have sexual fantasies, they get aroused etc. basketball is a sport and it does require a lot more cognitive abilities than sex because we are not innately basket ball players we all have to learn it but sex that's innate, all humans are sexual beings.
the reason why some people are horrible at sex is because they did not take the time to go read up on sex and on how to be good at it. The virgins who read on sex have a upper hand when they finally do have sex because they'll know exactly what to do for example, 2. they'll know what cues to look for to see if whether their girl is enjoying the things they are doing, 3. they'll know how to have sex with virgins and non virgins, 4. they'll know exactly how to make her climax and how to make sex less painful for a virgin why will they know all this.. it's because there is a lot of great sex information out there that is super easy to understand!.
most non virgin men have no idea how to make sex less painful for virgins my friend told me that her virgin boyfriend kept going even if it was sore can you imagine that😿 yep!.
the questions you are asking me are somewhat logical and that's not fair it's like you asking me is a man who want a woman who wears heels should also wear heels, we both know heels are a feminine thing not a lot of straight men wear them this question is irrelevant. but if it is a clothing thing then it would have to be a serious issue like modest clothing and revealing clothing, if you wand a girl who wears modest clothing then so should you, you should wear shirts in public as well and wear appropriate pants/jeans. I am trying to make logical arguments here that realistically apply to real like situations, Skirts, make up, heels, bras these are feminine things that most straight men will not wear at all so why should they wear them if they want a girl who wears them... makes no sense.
want*
piggy bag rides, i already answered this question by using the strength analogy:
But stuff like strength, we both know that most men are biologically stronger than women therefore a woman does not outwardly have to say she wants a man who can give her piggy back rides because there is a high chance that she will find a man who can give her piggy back, therefore this is not a fair question but since we are here, A strong man has every right to say he ONLY wants to be with a strong woman because he himself is strong. and a strong woman may be able to give him a piggy bag ride.
Okay, well, I disagree. I think if it was that easy, people who are bad at sex would just go read about it because it's just so easy. Obviously people who are bad at sex are very insecure about it and they'd definitely have incentive to learn about it, especially if it's "so easy" to do. But I think we'll have to just agree to disagree on this one.
Exactly. You wouldn't expect a man to wear heels even if he likes heels on his girl. This is a double standard, and it's a double standards that is not wrong. In the same way, I wouldn't expect my girlfriend to give me piggyback rides, I wouldn't expect her take out the trash, I wouldn't expect her to do handy-man jobs around the house, I wouldn't expect her to try and be dominant in the bedroom (nor would I want her to). It is entirely okay to have double standards, as long as they're mutually accepted.
your not getting mi point but it's okay many other people out there get me!.
your taking my points and distorting them, men are biologically dominant and women are biologically submissive so scratch your point off please. As for being handy that's a trait associated to masculinity so scratch that out it's pretty rare to find a woman who is handy because handiness is a masculine trait. heels are a feminine thing hun most straight men don't wear heel it is a feminine thing so you are basically distorting my argument by providing scenarios that happen rarely.
I already told you that I am pointing realistic traits and scenarios that happen a lot and I gave you many realistic examples to show you that "realistic" double standards are problematic. The scenarios you are giving are not realistic at all, and if they happen it would be very rare.
you don't want to admit that i am making a very fair argument here, i literally wrote about virginity so i will say it again if you are not a virgin human you have no right to say you only want a virgin partner because you yourself are not a virgin, you should instead be open to dating both virgins and non virgins, it is okay to have preferences but you have absolutely no right to say i only want, that right was taken away from you when you lost your virginity!.
please go check out the other many examples that i made of double standard scenarios that happen a lot that are completely wrong, and you'll see that I and many other people who agree with me have a good and fair point. As for sex you agreeing with me or not will not change the fact that anyone can be very good in bed despite if whether they are a virgin or not.
I am getting your point. Your point is that the double standard is wrong. And my point is that inherently, it's not, and congextually, it can be.
And what does it matter if being handy is generally masculine. There are handy women out there. It's a double standard. What about it being more common in men makes the double standard okay?