Sex before Marriage

Discussion of the SES, particularly in the UK.
a different guest

Postby a different guest » Fri Mar 26, 2004 12:16 am

I totally agree with you Alban.

The SES view of sex and marriages seems to come straight out of Mills and Boon.

And thank you Mike - Antises comment WAS insulting.

mgormez
Posts: 501
Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2003 9:33 pm
Location: Amsterdam
Contact:

Postby mgormez » Fri Mar 26, 2004 8:20 pm

Misty, I am going to chop your questions up in parts and anwser then when time permits, because otherwise it would get too much for me to do.

Misty wrote:
mgormez wrote:As luck would have it, the children are already born in this scenario. Perhaps you'd like big fosterhomes for the 'politically incorrect' parents who rather divorce than kill each other off slowely, but that does not appeal to me.


Isn't it a more stable foundation if children had both a mother and a father living under one roof?


That depends. I can't just give a blanket yes or no. There are too many factors that can spoil that scene.

I see single parent homes who do a good job and some try but can't offer the kids everything emotionally. Likewise for married couples. I don't regard not being able to give your child the latest Nike sneakers, a basic human right violation.

Misty wrote:If the couple was not married, in a consecquence of a minor argument it is much easier for a man to walk out of the house than if he was married.. am i right?

Why would it be easier for people not married? Just because of the marriage certificate? Non-married couples can have mortgages too, they love their kids equally, they can have signed 'living together' contracts that have legal value (in my country).


Misty wrote:And so marriage make you as a couple much stronger. It ties you with a bond, a bond which I belive gets stronger through the years. I don't understand how two people who 'once' loved each other, could end up wanting to kill each other, it does not seem to make much sense to me.

That was meant as a figure of speach.

Misty wrote:Perhaps they had no idea of the meaning of love when they got married? I belive that true love never disappears, in fact it could exist is many states, however no matter what state it is at- it still exists.



Can you imagine loving someone so much that it hurts, but still not want them near your kids?
Mike Gormez

User avatar
dottydolittle
Posts: 23
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2003 7:32 pm

Re: Sex, Marriage other nice stuff

Postby dottydolittle » Fri Mar 26, 2004 8:34 pm

Alban wrote:
And anyway...if we weren't meant to do it so much, then why is it so much fun.



Who said you wern't meant to do it too much?

I would also like to point out, that there are a lot of things that are 'fun' but are not neccessarily good. For instance, for those who love eating (chocolate) may consider it fun, however in the long run, it could possibly lead to obesity very easily without the right diet.

My point is that I belive self-dicipline is very very very healthy.. something I need to work quite a bit on. (i.e. I really treid giving up posting on this forum -but I just keep coming back!)

Alban
Posts: 271
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2004 11:23 am
Location: London

Postby Alban » Sat Mar 27, 2004 2:18 am

Anything in excess is bad for you, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't do it.

The point here is that it's not whether sex is good for you, but whether it should be sanctioned before marriage. If you want to deny yourself pleasure, experience, and a nice warm feeling in the regions that meditation cannot reach, then that's up to you. Let's just hope that you don't end up resenting all the years that you have wasted.

The thing about self-dicipline is that it can be yet another stick to beat yourself up with. Not only that, but that stick can be used against you if you let it. Remember, all work and no play makes Jack a dull boy!

mgormez
Posts: 501
Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2003 9:33 pm
Location: Amsterdam
Contact:

Postby mgormez » Sun Mar 28, 2004 12:45 am

Oki dokie, part II -- in a hurry so perhaps I sound snappy, but I am not. Just time restrains.

Misty wrote:For two people who once loved each other, it seems quite upseting that it could lead to such an extreme as physical violence. Do you think counselling would help?


Yes. But it is not a magic wand that will cause a 100% reduction.

It is not that strange that people get problems. Next time you have a tea with some friends, do the following: let everyone write up what they think the main characteristics of themselves are as they expect the friends will notice about them, and then let them write up what characteristics they notice in your friends from their POW.. Then compare notes. You will be surprised.


Misty wrote:NO matter how unhappy I would be, I would try and hide it as much as possible from my children. My mum hid her sadness for me, I would do the same for my children too.


If it was your father that caused it (no need to answer) I'd have looked for a better life for me and my kids.


Misty wrote:Ofcourse there comes a time when your children are grown up and it is almost impossible to hid anything from them, however it shopuld be possible to get along with someoen whom you once loved under the same household for your children?


I am not advocating a divorce / separation at the soonest when trouble start. But believe me, when your spouse would develop a serious gambling addiction that threatens the entire household, you would do wise to get help indeed. If that does not solve his addiction then you and the kids are better of without him jeopardizing the home.

That has nothing to do with not loving him anymore, but he has become a liability to the wellbeing of you and the kids.


Misty wrote:I am not saying, children cannot be brought up by sinlge parents, for I know quite a lot of people who have been brought up with one parent, however it must have been very hard atleast at some point of growing up both for the mother and the child, that is why in a ideal situation it is important for both the mother and father to be under one roof, and living happily as a family. As someone once said, this world is not ideal, however I will make this aspect of life ideal for me, for it is very important to me.



Understood and I respect that choice.
Mike Gormez

Misty

Postby Misty » Sun Mar 28, 2004 1:17 am

:eggface: hehehee is there going to be a part III?

mgormez
Posts: 501
Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2003 9:33 pm
Location: Amsterdam
Contact:

Postby mgormez » Sun Mar 28, 2004 1:56 am

Misty wrote::eggface: hehehee is there going to be a part III?


Yep! :wink: But not now, I've to get up early.
Mike Gormez

mgormez
Posts: 501
Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2003 9:33 pm
Location: Amsterdam
Contact:

Postby mgormez » Mon Mar 29, 2004 1:11 am

And part III -- Pfew! :silly:

mgormez wrote:You totally negate the fact that the parents can have just married too young and never got the chance trully to know each other and after a few years find they are not compatible, to the point of hating eachother's guts. [snip]

Misty wrote:I understand your view totally, for I also live in this world where everything is just not as black and white. However I look upon the HIndu tradition and wander how so many who have gone through arrannged marriages and still are together.


Misty, I have no statistical data on that so I can neither confirm nor deny your view, on how many marriages are still togheter.

Misty wrote:Doesn't compatibilty also matter to them? Doesn't their happiness matter to them?


I would be amazed if it didn't. Do you know any human being who doesn't mind being happy?

Misty wrote:then again perhaps they see more to life than compatibilty, and perhaps they are strong enough to make life happy.



Or perhaps, the wife has to do what the husband tells her to do, as I have so often witnessed in both Asia and Europe.


I have a hard time reading the things you write, assuming they come from someone who lives in the West and has the largest library to her disposal humankind has ever known. That is not meant to hurt or sound mean spirited, but is more in indication perhaps, of my own close mindedness.


However, don't you regard it as progress that people don't have to share their lives anymore with the man who can offer e.g. the most goats?

Slavery was abolished over much bloodshed, and no one reminiscences how cozy the bonfires were where the slaves hanged around after a hard day of work.
Mike Gormez

User avatar
a different guest
Posts: 620
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2004 12:13 am
Location: Australia

Postby a different guest » Mon Mar 29, 2004 10:37 am

From what I understand of Hindu culture, once a woman marries she is no longer a part of her blood family, but becomes a member of her husbands family. Popular hindu culture abounds with stories of young wives at the mercy of their merciless mother-in-laws. In a culture where being divorced is legally, socially, financially difficult for a woman, then yes you might find the rate of marriages "lasting" quite high - but is the woman happy?

In this country most divorces are instigated by the woman. From friends I have who HAVE divorced the reasons for their leaving their husbands have generally been either abuse or infidelity (on the husbands part). Misty - do you think either of these things are things that women should just put up with? Where these two issues have not been the case, the 3rd reason in my friends experience is that they have married too young, and drifted apart.

mgormez
Posts: 501
Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2003 9:33 pm
Location: Amsterdam
Contact:

Postby mgormez » Tue Mar 30, 2004 7:39 pm

mgormez wrote:Misty, I have no statistical data on that so I can neither confirm nor deny your view, on how many marriages are still togheter.


I went hunting of course but getting statistics on that subject proved to be pretty hard. But I did find some stuff:

?Based on a unique data set on the event history of marriage and
divorce collected in the In-Depth Fertility Surveys conducted in
Shanghai, Shaanxi, and Hebei in 1985 and a multivariate hazards model,
this paper investigates the association between divorce risk and
socio-demographic factors in China. Controlling for several other
socio-demographic factors, we demonstrate that the risk of divorce for
women who married before age 18 is twice as high as that of those
married after age 20; the risk of divorce of arranged marriages is
about 2.6 times as high as that of not-arranged ones.?

-- Association of Divorce with Socio-Demographic Covariates in China,
1955-1985 Event History Analysis Based on Data Collected in Shanghai,
Hebei, and Shaanxi by Yi Zeng, T. Paul Schultz, Deming D. Wang, Danan
Gu Published in Demographic Research, Vol 7: 404-431, 2002
Full text available by clicking on pdf link at
http://www.demographic-research.org/?ht ... s/vol7/11/


But it isn't all that black and white. Here are leads to keep reading for days.
http://answers.google.com/answers/main? ... &id=176729
Mike Gormez

Antises

Postby Antises » Tue Mar 30, 2004 8:58 pm

For balance, I wish to raise a few points regarding arranged marriages. An arranged marriage is not necessarily (and in the West, almost certainly not) a forced marriage or a marriage with a stranger, and when it is not forced it is likely to be (in my opinion) a successful union. The reasons often given for this (and I do not comment whether these are justified) are that you know least about yourself and who you might like, other people having a more objective view of you, and it ensures love can grow rather than possible infatuation dying out. Another point is that the media will always publish articles of physical abuse towards wives as a result of arranged marriages going wrong, because saying that there are many successful arranged marriages would neither be newsworthy nor would it be possible to obtain accurate evidence.

Adrasteia

Sex Education at St. James

Postby Adrasteia » Thu Apr 01, 2004 11:48 am

...it's a joke!
The course is called 'Love, Marriage and Sex'.
It consits of directions for choosing your spouse according to age and background...
"The man should be a quarter of his own age older than the girl"
...and such like.
There is one 'biology lesson' which is concerned with the genetalia, and that's it! ...so don't keep your hopes up!
The Hymen is also dead useful for stopping harmful bacteria etc. from getting in, it's main fuction I believe.
Take the spiritual aspects of what they say to mean: if you sleep with somone before you are married, ie. totally comitted it can really screw you up emotionally. 'The first cut is the deepest'. Can destabilise you. If your reaction is to try and seek comfort elsewhere, and that turns into sleeping around, it can also cause you big emotional problems as well as physical: STD's etc.
But yes, St. James sex education....interesting stuff!

adrasteia

the message before!

Postby adrasteia » Thu Apr 01, 2004 11:51 am

...sorry just realised I only read page one of the forum, so the previous message won't make much sense! Ah well!

User avatar
a different guest
Posts: 620
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2004 12:13 am
Location: Australia

Postby a different guest » Thu Apr 01, 2004 12:23 pm

WHY should the man be "one quarter older" than the women? Is this a rule?

As for the hymen - most active girls no longer have one by the time the have sex with someone.

The "first cut is the deepest"? Oh jeesh!

Misty

Postby Misty » Thu Apr 01, 2004 2:10 pm

a different guest wrote:WHY should the man be "one quarter older" than the women? Is this a rule?


No, it is not a rule.

There are five main principles to look at and are used as a guide when choosing a spouse..

1.the family and the its background, tradition and culture

2. the capacities, potentialities, and talents of the individuals (this includes education and 'training')

3.the nature of the individual which must be suitable for a good match (union)

4.the age factor, where the boy should be older than the girl, possibly a quarter more than the girl.

5.the wordly viability of the household in the day to day living; the sources and means to conduct a respectable household.

"These principles help provide a harmonious union. The laws set out by the wise explain the ideal. ANd we are encouraged always to reach for the ideal. There is no garantee that if all the five factors are met completely, the marriage will be filled with happiness. Nor is there the suggestion that if any factor is not adheard to, the marriage will be a disaster. Happiness in a marriage is dependant upon the decision to force all things together."


I personally belive that the principles were important to meet in the past because of arranged marriages.

I also do not belive that the fourth principle is mathematically correct, in the sense that the man who might have been a quarter more older than you when you were married, would not be any longer in about 5 years time.


Return to “General discussion of SES”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 72 guests