# Do you think you can keep your virginity and still maintain a long term relationship?



## Shygirl427 (May 25, 2008)

Do you think that you can be in a fulfilling long term relationship without having sex?


----------



## juizdelinha (May 23, 2012)

I think I could do it, not perpetually though.


----------



## Winds (Apr 17, 2011)

In theory I think I could. It would be an absolute cakewalk. Hell I waited this long, what's a couple of more months or years to me :lol


----------



## meeps (Dec 5, 2011)

"fulfilling", I don't think so. I have needs, but that's just me.


----------



## rymo (Sep 6, 2009)

**** no


----------



## River In The Mountain (Jun 6, 2011)

Ah, so, friends without benefits? 

Seriously, if both people are happy doing so then yeah, I don't see why not, but personally it wouldn't be my cup of tea. I would find it too difficult to not be intimate with the man I was attracted to and in a relationship with.


----------



## SoWrongItsRight (May 9, 2012)

It would be awfully hard


----------



## Xtraneous (Oct 18, 2011)

No.


----------



## NoName99 (Jul 3, 2011)

Yes, given that sex only happens in movies, I think I could...

... _if_ I wanted to. :no


----------



## DeeperUnderstanding (May 19, 2007)

I think you can, but why would you?


----------



## Shygirl427 (May 25, 2008)

Religious beliefs ^


----------



## DeeperUnderstanding (May 19, 2007)

^ You can still believe in God, and have sex. 

Most Christians don't follow that, you know.


----------



## CoastalSprite (Sep 8, 2011)

Sure, I'd prefer it actually.


----------



## andy1984 (Aug 18, 2006)

romantic asexuals could. i could not.


----------



## MaxPower (May 1, 2012)

In my opinion, no. Sex increases the intimacy of the relationship. Sex is not a romantic thing as seen in movies and TV shows. It is two people baring themselves to each other (literally and figuratively), letting out their raw emotions and engaging in something that is really mechanical, with each others complete trust and acceptance without fear of judgement. To me, it sounds more like you're after a close friendship instead of a relationship or at least not an intimate one.

That said, however, intimacy in a relationship can be built without sex, but it depends on the people involved. For example, two asexual people can create a loving and intimate relationship. So again, it all comes back to the players in the relationship, what they want out of it and what they are willing to put in.


----------



## Revenwyn (Apr 11, 2011)

Yep, it's possible. We managed 5 years, then lost it very shortly before we got married.


----------



## mdiada (Jun 18, 2012)

Nope, I wasn't able do wait. I've got urges that are difficult to control.


----------



## millenniumman75 (Feb 4, 2005)

Yes.
The whole point in a relationship is to get to know the person before having sex anyway. It is too rushed in this society - like Mutual of Omaha's Wild Kingdom.

Personally, not having sex would speed up the commitment period.


----------



## Ape in space (May 31, 2010)

Easily, yeah. I've gone 28 years without it, so it's not like I don't know how to live without it. (Of course, I would prefer to have sex eventually.... but I can wait as long as is necessary.) But I can't go without hugging. That is what I dream of more than anything.


----------



## LorenLuke (Jan 3, 2011)

WintersTale said:


> ^ You can still believe in God, and have sex.
> 
> Most Christians don't follow that, you know.


Doesn't mean that they shouldn't not follow it... (TANGENT FOR LATER!)



millenniumman75 said:


> Yes.
> The whole point in a relationship is to get to know the person before having sex anyway
> [...]
> 
> Personally, not having sex would speed up the commitment period.


^this

Plus it's a lot cleaner of a break up, should you break up if you don't.

Plus the phenomenon of 'POP! PREGNANCY! POP! BABY!' tends to be avoided if you keep it in your pants (or at least, you'll know the kid ain't yours, though your lady may have some explaining to do...).


----------



## Elixir (Jun 19, 2012)

I think it's possible. It depends on the people involved really.


----------



## PeachyAlice (Feb 8, 2012)

I was in a relationship for about a year before I had sex with him. For certain reasons I was very very afraid of losing my virginity. He accepted that and we did perfectly fine. He didn't pressure me to it and I believe he would've waited as long as necessary.

Edit: That being said, I think it might be impossible with a lot of people as, judging from this forum, everyone is desperate to have sex with everyone without hesitation. Personally I could STILL, having lost my virginity, do fine in a relationship where sex wasn't going to happen soon/at all.


----------



## sleepytime (Feb 18, 2011)

Not a hope for me.


----------



## millenniumman75 (Feb 4, 2005)

LorenLuke said:


> Doesn't mean that they shouldn't not follow it... (TANGENT FOR LATER!)
> 
> ^this
> 
> ...


Yep - "giving your all" too soon is a mess.


----------



## Luna Sea (Apr 4, 2012)

millenniumman75 said:


> Personally, not having sex would speed up the commitment period.


This is something I feel should be avoided though. We're hardwired to want sex, and it can mess with your head and make you rush into something. You should marry someone because you're 100% sure you want to spend the rest of your life with them, and being sexually frustrated from abstaining til marriage shouldn't have any part in that decision.


----------



## millenniumman75 (Feb 4, 2005)

TristanS said:


> This is something I feel should be avoided though. We're hardwired to want sex, and it can mess with your head and make you rush into something. You should marry someone because you're 100% sure you want to spend the rest of your life with them, and being sexually frustrated from abstaining til marriage shouldn't have any part in that decision.


Having sex will still quell any kind of motivation for commitment. Why get married when I can have all the sex I want. That is where all the problems begin.


----------



## Luna Sea (Apr 4, 2012)

The prospect of sex shouldn't be a motivation for marriage though. It's for the best if people who would think like that wouldn't get married.


----------



## Snare (Jun 23, 2012)

I think it really depends on the people involved, but personally I say why not.

I don't figure sex to be the goal in a relationship, and (in my opinion) a relationship without sex is in no way unfulfilling.

Though there are *lots* of people who would disagree quite violently, so again, it comes down to the people involved.

(This'd be heaven for a romantic asexual, though. :'D )


----------



## meeps (Dec 5, 2011)

millenniumman75 said:


> Having sex will still quell any kind of motivation for commitment. Why get married when I can have all the sex I want. That is where all the problems begin.


ehh...What? So people only get married because they want to have sex? If someone's just in it for the sex it doesn't matter how long they're willing to wait, they're still just in it, *for the sex*, and who would want someone to stay with them for that reason? As TristanS said already, sex should _absolutely not_ be the motivator for commitment.

If someone had that kind of mindset, they probably wouldn't be in a relationship to begin with anyway.


----------



## DeeperUnderstanding (May 19, 2007)

I think people should be open about sex. I'm not talking about having sex in public, or anything, but this "**** shaming" and etc that goes on among the conservatives is ridiculous. It's just as ridiculous as someone who is open about sex making a movie about a 40 year old virgin, and calling him a loser.


----------



## Mr Anonymous (Sep 18, 2010)

Not indefinitely, and obviously it would depend on the girl. I mean, I wouldn't be willing or even able to go long term and celibate if _she_ was constantly trying to get me to do it.


----------



## Iota (Mar 24, 2010)

It's very possible to wait. I know many couples that waited a long time, but it was because at least 50% of the party wanted to and the other person was supportive. Other people could never wait that long without some frustration.... so it really depends. It is possible that by waiting you could be potentially extending the life of the relationship or making it stronger, but that is not always true. Couples can just as easily have strong relationships without waiting a long time. People that would've been willing to move on quickly, to another person, would've been willing to do so anyway.


----------



## ohgodits2014 (Mar 18, 2011)

Emerald said:


> Do you think that you can be in a fulfilling long term relationship without having sex?


Maybe if both people are virgins or have random hang-ups about sex (including religion-related reasons).

Otherwise, not really.



> Personally I could STILL, having lost my virginity, do fine in a relationship where sex wasn't going to happen soon/at all.


I had the same belief when I was your age. I no longer do.


----------



## srschirm (Jun 25, 2006)

It's hard, because sex is such an important aspect of a relationship. I crave that closeness. Some people seem to be able to abstain though.


----------



## hypestyle (Nov 12, 2003)

a "romantic" relationship? Errr... 
by default, my SA has rendered any opposite sex-relationship to be platonic and nonromantic.. if/when I'm lucky enough to cross that bridge of romance, I don't want it to be platonic "forever" or even a year-long without some kind of intimacy.. no more settling for friend-zones.. enough!


----------



## Mirror (Mar 16, 2012)

Yes, I'm sure it can be done. 

But I could not and would not want to do it. I don't usually stick around long enough anyways. :/


----------



## LorenLuke (Jan 3, 2011)

komorikun said:


> Maybe you could just engage in oral/manual sex.


AKA, sex.


----------



## srschirm (Jun 25, 2006)

LorenLuke said:


> AKA, sex.


Agreed.


----------



## Shauna The Dead (Jun 16, 2005)

No. Men refuse to wait anymore. If you don't have sex prepare to be dumped eventually. Sad but true


----------



## srschirm (Jun 25, 2006)

Shauna The Dead said:


> No. Men refuse to wait anymore. If you don't have sex prepare to be dumped eventually. Sad but true


I wouldn't necessarily say this is true, but their does need to be some kind of warmth to the relationship. Most guys don't want to date a frigid woman.


----------



## Luna Sea (Apr 4, 2012)

Shauna The Dead said:


> No. Men refuse to wait anymore. If you don't have sex prepare to be dumped eventually. Sad but true


To be honest, the fact that virtually every post I read by you is "men are ****; all they want is sex" is starting to grate. But pretending this is the first post I've seen by you, for me it would mainly be about why they didn't want to have sex. The last girl I dated we didn't have sex for like the first 4 months, and I would've been prepared to go plenty longer if she had a real reason. The main problem I had was constantly thinking that we didn't because she didn't find me physically attractive.


----------



## Shauna The Dead (Jun 16, 2005)

TristanS said:


> To be honest, the fact that virtually every post I read by you is "men are ****; all they want is sex" is starting to grate. But pretending this is the first post I've seen by you, for me it would mainly be about why they didn't want to have sex. The last girl I dated we didn't have sex for like the first 4 months, and I would've been prepared to go plenty longer if she had a real reason. The main problem I had was constantly thinking that we didn't because she didn't find me physically attractive.


well obviously you havent read many of my posts then, i've only said this like twice recently. :roll


----------



## Luna Sea (Apr 4, 2012)

I guess I find your view to be disagreeable enough that two posts seems like twenty then :/


----------



## Shauna The Dead (Jun 16, 2005)

No one has to agree with me. In fact, no one ever agrees with anything I say. SO i dont care.
also, i never said men are **** in this thread. i just said prepare to be dumped if you dont give em what they want eventually.


----------



## Shauna The Dead (Jun 16, 2005)

plus i'm just going by my own personal experience. maybe there's a small percentage of guys out there who wouldnt dump a girl for this reason but the fact is, MOST would. they might stay a few months...but not years.


----------



## Luna Sea (Apr 4, 2012)

Yeah, because unless you're asexual, sex drive is just a fact of life. I just don't like your generalisation that *all* guys are only out for sex.


----------



## Shauna The Dead (Jun 16, 2005)

I said there might be a small percentage that arent. so there.


----------



## Shauna The Dead (Jun 16, 2005)

and its no different than some of the guys on here. i've seen multiple posts about how all women have it so much easier than men, all women can find a relationship easier, men who hate women who have kids and call them worthless, all women are *****es, etc. what's the difference? it's all generalizing. and a lot of people do it.


----------



## Shauna The Dead (Jun 16, 2005)

I also said I have a ****ed up brain now when it comes to what I think about men, I'm sure. When you've been in a hundred relationships and all the men were worthless pieces of ****, its hard to see anything else. Plus, Ive even had MEN tell me that all men are the same...when they admit it themselves thats pretty bad.


----------



## CopadoMexicano (Aug 21, 2004)

nope


----------



## srschirm (Jun 25, 2006)

Shauna The Dead said:


> I also said I have a ****ed up brain now when it comes to what I think about men, I'm sure. When you've been in a hundred relationships and all the men were worthless pieces of ****, its hard to see anything else. Plus, Ive even had MEN tell me that all men are the same...when they admit it themselves that's pretty bad.


Many men are the same in _certain aspects_, but they're not all jerks.


----------



## Witan (Jun 13, 2009)

No.


----------



## Luna Sea (Apr 4, 2012)

That stuff generalising all women to be this or that is annoying too, but there's so much of it going around that I just roll my eyes and close tab when I see it.



Shauna The Dead said:


> I also said I have a ****ed up brain now when it comes to what I think about men, I'm sure. When you've been in a hundred relationships and all the men were worthless pieces of ****, its hard to see anything else. Plus, Ive even had MEN tell me that all men are the same...when they admit it themselves thats pretty bad.


I've had women say that all women are really obsessed with sex (and most are just lying to not seem like slags). If any guy says that all men are the same, it just means he's a moron. And if you've dated a hundred people and they've all been ****s, it means that a lot of people are ****s (no one's denying that, goes for both genders) and you go for the kind of guys who are likely to be ****s. It's not a reflection on our whole gender if a lot of girls don't find nice guys attractive (well, I guess it is, but I'm sure you know what I mean)


----------



## Tentative (Dec 27, 2011)

No, but I'm sure there's people who would be able to. If it's enjoyable at all, that's another question.


----------



## komorikun (Jan 11, 2009)

LorenLuke said:


> AKA, sex.


Well, I don't know much about christianity. What are the rules exactly?


----------



## Freiheit (Dec 8, 2008)

Easily.


----------



## Shygirl427 (May 25, 2008)

So there's really no point of me dating if I'm not ready to have sex, huh?


----------



## Luna Sea (Apr 4, 2012)

There's no point in you dating anyone who doesn't have the same mindset, I'd say. There are people out there who wouldn't mind much. The problem would be with guys who would lie and say they're okay with it but really aren't.


----------



## Witan (Jun 13, 2009)

TristanS said:


> The problem would be with guys who would lie and say they're okay with it but really aren't.


Or guys who think they can wait, but quickly find out they can't and that they overestimated their patience.


----------



## LorenLuke (Jan 3, 2011)

komorikun said:


> Well, I don't know much about christianity. What are the rules exactly?


Given how many Christians act concerning this topic, I'd wager the rules are probably more ambiguous than how I see them as a part of a fading, old-fashioned minority.

But how I interpret it is simply put: don't with anyone you aren't married to...


----------



## Shygirl427 (May 25, 2008)

It still amazes me to see how much times have truly changed. Back then your virginity was seen as something sacred now it seems like it's something as small as kissing or to some people, shaking hands. Now i get the notion that sexuality is more fluid nowadays and im not of the stone age. But it just seems like sex is something everybody does and wants to do with whom ever. And now those who wait until marriage are now of the minority. Waiting is seen as abnormal when years ago it would be seen as typical. I guess I thought there was more to a relationship than sex. And while I understand that some people view it as being apart of a relationship. I still can't believe by some of your comments that it's seen as impossible for those two words to co-exist. Furthermore, why would you just do away with someone who has the potential to be your soul mate or the love of your life because they will not have sex with you. Aren't you then ruining your own potential happiness. But I guess it's more important to feel sexually satisfied instead. Just forget about emotional, intellectual, and spiritual satisfaction. 

Yes my decision to wait is based on my religious beliefs. But it only stemmed from that and is now purely a personal decision for me. What with all the pregnancy scares, stds, and just how tricky relationships can be . For me it seems like their are more negatives than positives. 

Then again, how would I know lol

Maybe I am more naive than I thought :/


Okay, I'm done...just had to get that out there.


----------



## Shygirl427 (May 25, 2008)

I have a feeling that my opinion will not be appreciated very much but that's okay


----------



## komorikun (Jan 11, 2009)

Well, they didn't have decent birth control 100 years ago. Antibiotics didn't exist either, so if you got chlamydia, gonorrhea, or syphilis you would be stuck with it for the rest of your life. I don't really understand why you don't just date someone from your church or whatever who is like minded.


----------



## Shygirl427 (May 25, 2008)

I could.... but having someone who believes in sex after marriage isn't the only thing I look for in a guy


----------



## srschirm (Jun 25, 2006)

I respect your view Emerald. I have to say when I am with someone I want to share that intimacy. One of the worst things I can imagine happening is marrying someone and them not wanting sexual intimacy.

Also, saying sex is as common as handshaking is hyperbole. I have probably shaken hands with 500 times more people than I have had sex with.


----------



## Shygirl427 (May 25, 2008)

srschirm said:


> I respect your view Emerald. I have to say when I am with someone I want to share that intimacy. One of the worst things I can imagine happening is marrying someone and them not wanting sexual intimacy.
> 
> Also, saying sex is as common as handshaking is hyperbole. I have probably shaken hands with 500 times more people than I have had sex with.


I would hope that you would know if you had sexual and physical chemistry towards someone before marrying them. Everyone wants to have that sexual need fulfilled by their partner, of course, but that doesn't mean you have to base your willingness to be in a relationship with someone based on if their going to meet your sexual needs right away. I'm finding that most people believe that having or not having sex is an end all, be all. But I don't believe that it should. You can create sexual intimacy without going the full distance. And I would argue that waiting would only add to a new marriage if it wasn't introduced yet.

I do realize that comparing the commonality of sex to shaking hands is a bit extreme. But that was the idea. To show just how sex is not as sacred or special as it once was but has a more care free attachment to it.


----------



## leave me alone (Apr 1, 2011)

If the person involved was absolutely special to me, then yes I could do that, but not if the religion is the only reason. If she's deeply convinced, that it is what she wants then I would consider it.



Emerald said:


> I have a feeling that my opinion will not be appreciated very much but that's okay


I liked some of your points. There are far more important aspect to the relationship, than sex. It should matter more to be compatible on emotional level, above all. Sex is something that you can work on eventually and improve.


----------



## srschirm (Jun 25, 2006)

Emerald said:


> I would hope that you would know if you had sexual and physical chemistry towards someone before marrying them. Everyone wants to have that sexual need fulfilled by their partner, of course, but that doesn't mean you have to base your willingness to be in a relationship with someone based on if their going to meet your sexual needs right away. I'm finding that most people believe that having or not having sex is an end all, be all. But I don't believe that it should. You can create sexual intimacy without going the full distance. And I would argue that waiting would only add to a new marriage if it wasn't introduced yet.
> 
> I do realize that comparing the commonality of sex to shaking hands is a bit extreme. But that was the idea. To show just how sex is not as sacred or special as it once was but has a more care free attachment to it.


One fear many men have is not having sex after marriage. You've probably heard the jokes that go like "the biggest anti-aphrodisiac is wedding cake." That's what we hear and honestly many of my friends' experiences corroborate these jokes.

A lot of people think they have to see if their sexual needs will be met right away so as not to get stuck with someone who won't fill them eventually...

I agree that waiting could add to a new marriage. I also generally believe it's good not to live together before marriage, although in this day and age that is economically harder and harder.

Usually it seems like sex isn't as valued by those who want to wait longer....or better put, the people who want to wait don't enjoy it as much as those who want it sooner. That is what people like me are afraid of.


----------



## VanDamMan (Nov 2, 2009)

Emerald said:


> I could.... but having someone who believes in sex after marriage isn't the only thing I look for in a guy


The chances you'll find a non-religious guy willing to wait until marriage is nil to none. If staying a virgin until marriage is something you won't compromise, you should only be shopping at church.


----------



## srschirm (Jun 25, 2006)

VanDamMan said:


> The chances you'll find a non-religious guy willing to wait until marriage is nil to none. If staying a virgin until marriage is something you won't compromise, you should only be shopping at church.


Church would probably be the best place to find such a fella.


----------



## Luna Sea (Apr 4, 2012)

Emerald said:


> I would hope that you would know if you had sexual and physical chemistry towards someone before marrying them. Everyone wants to have that sexual need fulfilled by their partner, of course, but that doesn't mean you have to base your willingness to be in a relationship with someone based on if their going to meet your sexual needs right away. I'm finding that most people believe that having or not having sex is an end all, be all. But I don't believe that it should. You can create sexual intimacy without going the full distance. And I would argue that waiting would only add to a new marriage if it wasn't introduced yet.
> 
> I do realize that comparing the commonality of sex to shaking hands is a bit extreme. But that was the idea. To show just how sex is not as sacred or special as it once was but has a more care free attachment to it.


I think I already said in this topic that the excitement of being able to have sex shouldn't be part of the equation for marriage.

My views about sex are basically "if you'll both enjoy it, why wait years just for the sake of waiting?" and that while I don't think giving it away like hot cakes is that great (although I don't care if someone does that), waiting years for some guy who doesn't even know you to declare your relationship proper is a bit much. I'd say a good timeframe for possibly having sex is more like 1-3 months.


----------



## meganmila (Jul 25, 2011)

I don't understand why you have to wait to have sex until you marry. I never got that concept. I mean if you start having sex what if you are not sexually compatible...and what if you are not even attracted to him sexually. Then it all goes downhill. And what if you never get married. It all seems weird. You don't have to marry if virginity means a lot to you why just wait till someone you love and then have sex...just to be in a relationship. Marriage is such a huge step. But whatever...haha..


----------



## DeeperUnderstanding (May 19, 2007)

Sure, you don't have to wait until marriage to have sex. But it's tied into religion, and is important for many people.


----------

