Questions for social conservatives about teen girls and chastity
Studies show that the main reason teen-aged girls are sexually active is not for sexual pleasure or even romantic “love.” Their primary motive is a desire for a social life. Like many adult women, both married and single, adolescent girls often endure partnered sex acts rather than enjoy them.
Quite frequently, young ladies who are sexually active are either trying to hold on to a boyfriend or to ensure that they spend their weekends with a male. In the words of one non-sexually active young lady who wrote to an advice columnist and signed herself “Nice Girl,” guys don’t often bother dating “a girl who won’t shell out,” so while the sexually active girls date, Nice Girl lamented “I am going to movies with my girlfriends.” The latter, presumably, are other virgins ignored by guys looking for sex.
If the average young girl views homosociality as a crown of thorns, solitude is seen, by teenagers of either gender, as a fate worse than death. The word “loner” is almost synonymous with “mental case.”
Some might say that sex is not the only reason boys seek the company of girls. An attractive girl with a good personality will have a hetero-social life even if she is chaste.
This may or may not be true. But this message is booby-trapped. To the ears of the less-popular, a bad personality can translate “bad person” (rather than referring to social skills and mannerisms). What’s more, it stigmatizes the girl who doesn’t have a hetero-social life — thus making her all the more desperate for male company.
So, social conservatives, what can we do to make teen-aged girls feel privileged to be with each other? How do we help them take pride in same-sex outings?
Are there ways to encourage boys to seek the company of chaste girls?
I’m writing this in the assumption that most people think solitude unhealthy for our socially oriented species but if anyone thinks such a lifestyle is a good one and that it can and should be brought into fashion, I’d welcome his or her suggestions.
| More from Denise Noe
Stumble It!
July 18th, 2007 at 6:37 am
RScott #48
Other than what I said, was an “ideal” situation and the best in regards to sexual intercourse.
As for solutions, well I don’t have any. You put forth excellent questions, but I just don’t know how to fix decades of damage done by women.
The relationships between men and women have become so adversarial, dunno?
July 18th, 2007 at 6:32 am
#43 RScott said, I agreed with all you said.
I advocate wait for sex until marriage, but only if the current system of marriage is scarped, due to all the flaws you pointed out.
A lot would have to be done to undo 40 years of feminist activism, and attacks on men, women, and children.
July 18th, 2007 at 5:41 am
“the logical next questions to put forward to this elite group may include —
* what do you recommend?
* what can be redeemed?
* what is the future of gender warfare/ possible reconciliation?”
Good questions all. The “wait till “marriage”" argument is definitely hopeless since we no longer even have a common definition of the word and the society as a whole no longer connects sex and “marriage”. I tried to wait till marriage, she was my fiancee, but she was experienced sexually even though I was not. This was 28 years ago – so I certainly hold out no hope for the “virgin till marriage” fantasies of today. Marriage is a financial transaction in today’s world and should never be entered into without an unequal partner.
Putting biology on hold? Stop it all together? Isn’t this what the feminists tried to do only to discover the vast majority of women were heterosexual and didn’t want to follow the lesbian model? This makes about as much sense as trying to reverse gravity, make the planet spin in the opposite direction, etc.
The facts is that social interaction is a competitive marketplace and it includes sex. I have a girlfriend I adore, but we rarely see each other since she chose to put her sex life on hold as she has teenage children. We will occassionally get together, even with her kids, but it is very frustrating. She will not even go out of town with me for fear her kids will think she is having sex and use that as an excuse for themselves! Marriage is not a possibilty; getting married to obtain sex is analogous to committing suicide to obtain freedom! She denies herself in an effort to prevent them from responding to their raging hormones – and I think she understands it will probably fail. I often wish “Dr Laura” would just go away!
July 18th, 2007 at 12:01 am
wadestar, thank you. I guess I am like the famed monkey on the typewriter. I am bound to get something right occasionally.
July 17th, 2007 at 9:20 pm
christianj –
“Why are males still getting married even though studies have shown that sex stops, when marriage begins…”
Boys grow up in a seamless Matriarchy from birth through high school. Every social space they occupy is administered and controlled by women — they are called moms, aunts, grandmas, sisters, day-care providers, K-12 & HS teachers.
If the boy-man somehow survives this institutional tyranny and screening system, he might go on to college.
Where he is introduced to the professional variety of institutionalized feminists in the form of professors, administrators, and the 58% majority of college students —oh, they happen to be female!
So really the answer to your question is that CHIVALRY is apparently in men’s DNA — it’s like a gender-suicide pact — and no amount of social contempt or pervasive misandry will persuade the average man that he is a commodity and an object of female exploitation.
To admit that would be … unmanly.
July 17th, 2007 at 9:04 pm
There are too many excellent insights about the tragedies and contradictions of American sexuality implied here…
Really what a fine salon of writers and a worthwhile thread…)
So, since you all have so eloquently described from varoius perspectives the nature and dimensions of the dilemma — very poor and problematic gender relations and unsatisfactory sexual quests –
the logical next questions to put forward to this elite group may include —
* what do you recommend?
* what can be redeemed?
* what is the future of gender warfare/ possible reconciliation?
July 17th, 2007 at 9:04 pm
All comments concerning being “privileged Princesses” are totally true. We have heard wimmin bragging about the fact that they do not pay when going out to dinner, theatre or function, they expect to be paid for and they encourage each other in pursuing this financially blackmailing males as standard behaviour…
Women are totally stingy and selfish with their money.
Why are males still getting married even though studies have shown that sex stops, when marriage begins…
It’s probably why vibrator sales have reached new highs, another example of women being unable to be satisfies with anything and need mechanical assistance so she can do it to herself…now she’s got no-one to moan to..
July 17th, 2007 at 8:48 pm
Joi and others advocating no sex without marriage.
I certainly hope you mean traditional marriage – the kind that virtually no longer exists. The kind my parents had, fifty years before my father’s death separated them. There is ZERO correlation between the traditional or “biblical” marriage and today’s “legal” marriage. I would participate in the first; was a victim of the second. It won’t happen again and I recommend to younger men they do NOT marry unless they find a woman with as much to lose financially and professionally as they do. No other marriage is possible under the cuirrent “justice” system – and even then there is no assurance that she won’t suddenly change after the marriage of when a child is born. Unilateral divorce is too great a risk, often compared to Russian roulette with even worse odds. Simple fact: if you don’t get married, you won’t experience divorce. The possible exception is a marriage entrapment state (called “common law”), where making the mistake of signing any legal document that might be interpreted as a “married” situation could entrap you. Don’t even live with a woman in one of these states; much like the “automatic arrest” states where a man is jailed just because someone makes a “911 hangup” call from his home. The result of these new feminists indocrtrinated laws is perfect equality – women live in their own houses just as men do. Period. End of story. I’m 48 and fully realize I will never have children under the new and offensive rules. Congratulations Feminists! You won! Our country will be ruled in the future by illegal aliens who are NOT subject to our family courts. The true death of a society.
July 17th, 2007 at 5:28 pm
To ‘amfortas’…
I have read your comments to other articles and have never been particularly impressed with your lines of arguement but have to say I am completely amazed with your insight to this article. Well said throughout.
Denise, I repeat my earlier accusation… you are blaming the wrong sex. I have no sympathy for women complaining about there being no ‘nice’ men out there. You women have made your bed, now you can go masterbate in it by yourself.
Women who can’t find men whine that they can’t find men and women who find men complain that they don’t like being with them… and it always seems to be the man’s fault.
People, men or women, who take the responsibility for their own happiness seem to find it. People who expect other people to make them happy, not only are not happy but, remarkably, they blame everyone else for their misery.
I like amfortas’ comment that these women whing that they only ‘endure’ sex didn’t seem to have trouble enjoying sex with their boyfriends before they were married, so I guess your whole women as an orifice has nothing to do with it. I think the fact that marriage has made sex unenjoyable for them clearly indicate that they were using their sex to entrap the man into marriage. Once they had the marriage the sex was a useless tool for them. What’s to enjoy.
July 17th, 2007 at 5:12 pm
“The more initiating, adventurous, daring, interesting, inventive, open and reaching out to her he is, the more ‘demanding’, ‘needy’ or ‘perverted’ he is likely to be considered.”
AND she will nag and be upset about any and everything you tell her – so you learn to tell her as little as possible.
July 17th, 2007 at 1:32 pm
amfortas #38. you gotta get out of my head!
July 17th, 2007 at 8:35 am
Again – who is delivering these messages to other girls, that they are losers, closet lesbians, etc?
The Answer: OTHER GIRLS!
The Solution: Stop teaching girls to do that.
Question: Why do girls feel like they have to sleep with boys to have relationships with them?
The Answer: Because the modern princess culture has made it so that it’s the only reason boys will endure female company.
The Solution: Maybe – teach girls to actually respect and like boys – instead of hold them in contempt – and they might have something to offer BESIDES sex.
Not rocket science.
July 17th, 2007 at 5:10 am
Denise responds: “As I pointed out in the next sentence, it is no one’s fault”
Maybe, Denise, maybe. But all so often the man is made responsible and carries the ‘blame’. The Family Court carries on this same blame projection onto the man, even though they too pretend that its no-one’s ‘fault’.
In bed, men, having been raised with the expectation that they are responsible for what happens, seem almost too willing to carry the can for his partners’ lack of desire, lack of effort, lack of willingness. (He didn’t give her an orgasm, poor deprived thing! what an insensitive beast he is). She, raised to off-load the responsibility, is all to willing to find fault, even when, as you say, it isn’t anyone’s fault, or when it is clearly her’s.
You have mentioned before about your mastabatory exploits as a girl and that raises yet another issue about the couple situation. Her need for long involved foreplay to become aroused. I wonder how long you took. I bet it didn’t need a day and a half. One can be humourous about the ‘normal’ situation men find themselves in with their spouse/girlfriend.
For him, foreplay is fraught with problems. Men prefer 30 to 45 Seconds of foreplay, less if at all possible. For the man, driving back to her place is considered a part of foreplay.
No woman understands why this is.
Women prefer 30 to 45 Minutes of foreplay, in addition to a bubbly spa with Champagne and dinner out in a restaurant; and (if she is in a ‘relationship’) him doing the washing up, vacuuming, putting out the rubbish and mowing the lawn.
As well as grocery shopping, washing & ironing, putting up shelves, re-arranging the furniture…..
And begging.
This adds another 12 hours on average; sometimes a whole week.
It is a mystery to him why these things didn’t turn her on when she was single and did them all herself. ( Apart from the begging).
She “needs” to be turned on to, and by, him, each time, generally with some effort on his part.
She expects him to be turned on to her all the time she’s there. Only her. Not the hem of any old dress. Not by any other female. Not by his own hormones. Her. He is to be totally disinterested any time she is out of his sight.
He has to initiate. He has to reach out to her, be sexually adventurous, interesting, open, inventive and daring.
She wants to be ‘taken’.
She sees sex as a form of ‘communication’. She wants to know his most secret sexual thoughts. His history and experience with other women. His fantasies. She wants him to ‘Talk to her’.
He is reluctant. He wants to avoid this. He thinks she will not like it. So, he asks for her secret thoughts, fantasies, history etc., too, to head it off.
Mistake.
She lists between 100 and 500 men who all ‘pursued her relentlessly ‘ and she ‘gave in to’, was ‘swept away’ by, or was ‘forced to do it for /to him’ and were all either fantastic in bed or total jerks.
Her fantasies are few and involve a 19th Century Crinoline, or a hooped dress, and a fan. She doesn’t have any sexual thoughts at all unless she’s with him; and they are about her. She does not use a single rude word. She swears it’s the truth.
He believes her. He tells her. All. The truth, too. To be fair. His reality is the four women in his past and the several thousand who he lusted after but wouldn’t give him the time of day. His fantasies involve a cast of a modest theatre company and would keep a porn script-writer in business for a year.
She hates him. He talks ‘dirty’.
The more initiating, adventurous, daring, interesting, inventive, open and reaching out to her he is, the more ‘demanding’, ‘needy’ or ‘perverted’ he is likely to be considered.
For him, foreplay is very complicated. And she still isn’t turned on.
But later, alone with her vibrator……..
July 17th, 2007 at 4:34 am
amfortas said,
Denise observes: “From both what I’ve heard and read, I know married women say they could not “repond” to their husbands. A married woman wrote, “Sex can be boring, sweaty, awkward, and just plain painful.” Again, this isn’t anything against marriage. It just means marriage is no sexual panacea. The truth that women can endure rather than enjoy sexual intercourse is not the result of a male supremacist conspiracy.”
How about it being a female conspiracy, Denise.
(Denise) As I pointed out in the next sentence, it is no one’s fault. It’s the result of the way the genitals are constructed. The vagina is an orifice and can be entered without the woman being sexually aroused. Of course, this is true of the rectum and mouth as well, organs common to both sexes.
>
(Denise) There are any number of reasons. She could have been enculturated into the “nice girls don’t” ideology which would usually be by her mother and/or other females. You see this in movies like “Splendor in the Grass,” “Carrie,” and elsewhere. People, especially other females, might have poisoned her mind with “men are beasts” sayings which left her unable to respond. She may have been a victim of sexual abuse which would usually, although not always, be by a male.
As far as “too many rejections formed a habit,” I’ve read that “teasers,” women who make a habit of heavy petting without orgasmic release can end up unable to reach climax at all, at least with a partner.
>
(Denise) In one program about a non-responsive wife, the wife said she agreed to allow her husband to have a girlfriend so they could keep the marriage together and raise their children.
By projecting ‘endurance’ rather than pleasure she puts the responsibility onto him, and the blame, for her being ‘bored’. Sweaty? Of course its sweaty. Its supposed to be sweaty. Its great, sweaty.
(Denise) I was quoting someone else. Masturbation is sweaty too. As a teenager, I used to soak through my bedspread with sweat when masturbating.
Awkward? Maybe she should try wielding a penis and see how awkward that is with a whinging partner! Lesbians must often have a really crappy time with the strap-on if the one on the recieving end is half as whiney as the average wife!
Lesbians; who blames whom?>>
(Denise) Each can blame the other. Lesbians can easily have incompatible sexualities. A lesbian friend of mine had a lot of problems with her last female partner for several reasons but one of them was that the partner wanted to have sex something like three times a day, every day. My friend is not nearly that horny but that wasn’t what broke up the relationship. I was her partner’s physical abusiveness.
Lesbian Bed Death is notorious as a problem faced by many longtime female-female couples (although it didn’t quite apply to the couple mentioned above!).
July 17th, 2007 at 4:10 am
Denise observes: “From both what I’ve heard and read, I know married women say they could not “repond” to their husbands. A married woman wrote, “Sex can be boring, sweaty, awkward, and just plain painful.” Again, this isn’t anything against marriage. It just means marriage is no sexual panacea. The truth that women can endure rather than enjoy sexual intercourse is not the result of a male supremacist conspiracy.”
How about it being a female conspiracy, Denise. Why can’t she “respond to her husband”? Too many rejections formed a habit? Keeping him keen by feigning her lack of interest? She gets ASS; Adulthood Avoidance Syndrome. He bloody well has to respond to her or all hell breaks loose !
By projecting ‘endurance’ rather than pleasure she puts the responsibility onto him, and the blame, for her being ‘bored’. Sweaty? Of course its sweaty. Its supposed to be sweaty. Its great, sweaty. Awkward? Maybe she should try wielding a penis and see how awkward that is with a whinging partner! Lesbians must often have a really crappy time with the strap-on if the one on the recieving end is half as whiney as the average wife!
Lesbians; who blames whom?
Endure indded. That is from victimology 101
July 17th, 2007 at 3:03 am
conservativation said,
Denise, please, “most girls like many women ENDURE partnered sex rather then enjoy it”. I shut down right there.
Among so many of the other things contributing to the divorce epidemic, is the ease with which you make such a statement.
(Denise) I’m very pro-marriage. I’ve often recommended marriage. I just received the news from a young male friend of mine that he proposed marriage to his girlfriend and that she accepted. I’m very happy for them both.
However, it is true that enduring sex by women can take place within marriage. When I was growing up, some of the bitterest comments about men and sex I heard came from married women. And no, they were not feminist, “I am women, hear me roar” types. Rather, their attitude was the old-fashioned one expressed by the title character in the movie “Marnie” that “men are filthy pigs and women are weak and feeble.” From both what I’ve heard and read, I know married women say they could not “repond” to their husbands. A married woman wrote, “Sex can be boring, sweaty, awkward, and just plain painful.”
Again, this isn’t anything against marriage. It just means marriage is no sexual panacea.
The truth that women can endure rather than enjoy sexual intercourse is not the result of a male supremacist conspiracy. It is the result of the way the human genitals are constructed with the female organ being an orifice.
July 17th, 2007 at 2:56 am
bigpapa said,
There is nothing wrong with same sex group outings….
What’s the big deal,, sometimes you just want to be able to be around people you don’t feel you need to impress or you can let your gaurd down.
(Denise) The reason I mentioned young women regarding same sex relationships as second rate was that the teen girl who wrote to the advice columnist seemed to consider it a deprivation that she couldn’t get dates with boys and was “going to movies with [her] girlfriends.”
I can also assure you there are plenty of male vigins out there who would be happy to go on a date,,, but usually the girls won’t go due to their looks or perceived social status.
(Denise) This is a good point. All too often, male virgins are subjected to ridicule. Young women should seek their company, particularly if they are not trying to get sexual experience. If young women ridicule male virgins or consider them abnormal, they are part of the problem.
July 16th, 2007 at 9:17 pm
Parents must remember, children are natural mimics, who act like their parents despite every effort to teach them good values. Children seldom misquote you. in fact, they usually repeat word for word what you shouldn’t have said. – anon
When two parent families are all but nonexistent, and mom and dad demonstrate promiscuous behavior, what does society expect from teenagers? Teenage girls denied a loving father’s approval will desperately seek a male’s attention.
July 16th, 2007 at 8:46 pm
Biblically PC is an oxymoron. The points stand, have for centuries.
July 16th, 2007 at 8:37 pm
Oh crap!
Another potentially interesting thread….. CRUCIFIED ….
by the Bibically PC-correct squad.
If he could post WWJS?
July 16th, 2007 at 7:48 pm
You can lead a horse to water in this case the life giving water of the holy scripture, but you can’t make him drink, in this case believe.
All have been shown the TRUTH. That’s all I can do.
July 16th, 2007 at 7:44 pm
Sex without the “relationship” will ultimately cheapen it. A TRUE relationship can only occur if both man and woman know their place in the relationship and nurture each other. Sex is just an enhancement upon that relationship.
Today, the only relationship between men and women is “adversarial.” The Bible shows the order of the sexes and the gender roles. Either follow it or proceed at your own peril.
July 16th, 2007 at 7:05 pm
Denise, please, “most girls like many women ENDURE partnered sex rather then enjoy it”. I shut down right there.
Among so many of the other things contributing to the divorce epidemic, is the ease with which you make such a statement.
If you accept the Bible, we are to be available to one another, it keeps our minds focused on things besides sex. When on a diet we think of food, when starved for sex we think of sex. We “handle” each other so we can focus on the family, others who need us, and not on sexual sin.
Outside thee Bible, do you honestly think we are made, evolved, whatever you want to say, to content ourselves with vibrators and porn? Even the strictest evolutionist sees a strong motivation in propagating the species. Is that an altruistic drive or is it pleasure?
I am sorry you are happy alone with batteries and plastic, but there are women, lots, who enjoy not just us men’s part of the sex…the physical, but the companionship as well.
Someone sold you a bill of goods Denise. Based on what Ive read from you, you are projecting big time.
The correct balance of sexuality, the Biblical model, is goods for society. Somewhere along the line women bought the lie you seem to subscribe to. You cannot even begin to extrapolate teen recommendations from such a flawed perspective.
Social conservatives are very pro-sex, in marriage and appropriate. You are way off from the start.
July 16th, 2007 at 6:53 pm
Also –
“Their primary motive is a desire for a social life. Like many adult women, both married and single, adolescent girls often endure partnered sex acts rather than enjoy them.”
Nope. Not buying that false logic at all.
These so-called adolescent girls are simply learning HOW TO HUNT!
Refining their skills and tactics.
Their primary motive is to bag their prey.
Let’s be just a little honest about the superior predatory gender and its tender sensibilities, OK?
July 16th, 2007 at 6:35 pm
This is at some level about the popular “Go Girlzzz” Raunch Culture that their mother’s version of feminism has gifted upon today’s young women.
Young women have been bamboozled (feminist porn term) into becoming convinced that “liberation and freedom” = self-inflicted promiscuity.
Of course, the old double-standard has not gone away. Boys still get to score. Girls now get to score too.
But the moralistic social math ultimately condemns the scoring girls as sluts, skanks, and ho’s.
In defining themselves as commodities — vaginas for rent — the fourth wave post-feminists have not only lost the gender wars — they have forgotten the actual point of the original struggle.
Well, there’s always shopping, girls!
(Try to marry a doctor….)
July 16th, 2007 at 4:43 pm
“How can we help chaste girls to have better social lives or to enjoy solitude?”
IMO, the problem here is not so much heterosociality as it is that girls are seeking a social payoff from it. the supply of boys with whom it is socially advantageous to socialize with is considerably smaller than the supply of women seeking to monopolize the attention of these boys.
When a girl seeks out these boys, she has nothing aside from “putting out” to offer him. On the other hand, there are any number of boys whose social standing would be immeasurably enhanced simply by being seen in a girls company.
If a girl doesn’t want to pay the price that goes with being seen with a member of the football team, perhaps she can find a boy that has something besides carnal knowledge to gain from being with her.
Guys who wont demand sex are not unavailable, they are merely invisible to the average girl. A girl who values chastity and still wishes to have a heterosocial life only needs to open her eyes to other options.
July 16th, 2007 at 2:57 pm
pk wrote “I moved away from the Christian faith because I came to believe that it was suicidal:”
I’m sorry to hear you moved away… Christianity is basically about a “relationship” between yourself and Christ Jesus. As a Christian you should try to be “Christ like” not to be “the Christ.” No Christian is capable of sinless perfection, but we have a moral compass which is the bible and we have faith, love and hope. Pagans do not.
July 16th, 2007 at 2:40 pm
Hi pk….
PK wrote: ” I respect your opinion, but quite frankly the Bible isn’t a great moral authority on how people should lead their DAILY lives. ”
Sure it is, just look at the 10 commandments for starters… The bible is full of stories and examples on how to live life morally.
“And God spoke all these words, saying: ‘I am the LORD your God…
ONE: ‘You shall have no other gods before Me.’
TWO: ‘You shall not make for yourself a carved image–any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.’
THREE: ‘You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain.’
FOUR: ‘Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.’
FIVE: ‘Honor your father and your mother.’
SIX: ‘You shall not murder.’
SEVEN: ‘You shall not commit adultery.’
EIGHT: ‘You shall not steal.’
NINE: ‘You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.’
TEN: ‘You shall not covet your neighbor’s house; you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, nor his male servant, nor his female servant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor anything that is your neighbor’s.’
July 16th, 2007 at 2:08 pm
Joi,
I respect your opinion, but quite frankly the Bible isn’t a great moral authority on how people should lead their DAILY lives. Christ died on a cross and most of his apostles met unpleasant ends as well. Strict fundamentalist Judaism is a cruel, barbaric system that the Jews quietly secularized over the years. Have you seen any adulterers stoned to death lately or women killed for wearing men’s clothing (jeans?)
I moved away from the Christian faith because I came to believe that it was suicidal: That it preaches that mankind’s struggles with evil will never be won until the world ends. People don’t go to heaven immediately. They just sit in the ground and wait for the apocalypse. Most people don’t think too much about this since they cherry pick the good parts (and there are many) about Christianity such as forgiveness, charity, etc. and put on blinders about the rest.
July 16th, 2007 at 11:47 am
Oh, I’m sorry. What was I thinking? I mean to think that silly little book called the Bible would have anything to teach us… We are just so much smarter than the Apostles, or even Jesus Christ himself. We don’t need any of that silly stuff. We’ll just keep doing things our own way. We are so smart ya know.
July 16th, 2007 at 11:45 am
The one making the most sense here, in my opion, is redrajesh:
“They should be made to take pride in doing things on their own instead of getting someone else to do things for them. And they should be made to take pride in being self sufficient instead of dependent.”
I think a lot of the problem comes from the way that children have been told to socialize for generations. John Taylor Gatto continually brings these points up in his writing and speeches. We are living with a decades-old system of forced, government schooling and regulated, standardized higher education. This is not natural for humanity. It is not good for children to be boxed in all day with their immediate peers, separated from nature, their families, and surrounding communities. These women who are desperate for male attention with ticking biological clocks, are all victims of a perverted social order that essentially had no choice but to slowly become morally degraded. If your whole world view is shaped by how you fit in with your peers, then solitude can seem like solitary confinement, and being left out of the mainstream can seem like death.
These women need to do as the men must also do: throw off the chains of public schooling, and the lie that everyone must go to college to be successful. For the most part, the richest people in the world never went to college, while suicide rates for the public-schooled, college-educated middle class creeps ever higher. Children who spend their days around people of all ages, learning to work and enjoy the product of their own labors at an early age, are far better off. When’s the last time you heard these complaints from Amish women?
July 16th, 2007 at 11:43 am
It’s all a moral issue in the end of the day….
Society uses popular culture to obtain its moral compass. Hence, morality changes with the ebb and flow of society.
Society using the bible as a source of morality is constant. The bible doesn’t change.
Unless, society embrasses biblical principles there is no way for women to be chaste.
July 16th, 2007 at 11:10 am
Gonzman, how do we get them to realize that “going to movies with girlfriends” isn’t second rate?
Have other women stop delivering them that message.
Is there a way to convince them that a homosocial life is as good as a heterosocial one?
Have other women stop calling them lesbians for doing it.
Some girls are lonely and might be tempted to have sex to have a social life. How do we encourage them to find solace in solitary pursuits?
Have the other women who are delivering the message that those who are “alone on a Saturday night” are losers stop doing that.
How do we encourage boys to seek the company of girls who won’t have sex?
Reduce the supply of women who will have sex by encouraging Morality, applying shame, and not allowing those who do have sex to dodge the consequences of that; and encourage young women to treat boys is such a way as they have something to offer BESIDES sex.
July 16th, 2007 at 11:10 am
There is nothing wrong with same sex group outings….
What’s the big deal,, sometimes you just want to be able to be around people you don’t feel you need to impress or you can let your gaurd down.
In my observations over the years I’ve come to the conclusion that lots of young women (more so than men) turn to sex to find the attention they didn’t get at home due to a broken family.
It’s guaranteed attention, even if it’s not healthy in the long run.
I can also assure you there are plenty of male vigins out there who would be happy to go on a date,,, but usually the girls won’t go due to their looks or perceived social status.
It’s incorrect to assume that all males get it all the time.. very wrong.
July 16th, 2007 at 10:25 am
There’s a lot of hogwash here. Sex does not lead, through pregnancy, to abortions. Sex leads to babies. Abortions are an interference, an ‘accepted’ wickedness on the part of women who have cut men out of the decision loop.
Sex is a healthy human drive which women have turned into a commodity, to be sold. Young girls can make all the excuses they like and blame boys all they like but it doesn’t get past the problem of girls selling sex to get popularity and privilege. And then they whine about a lack of intimacy. They whine about men (as if they knew any!) only wanting one thing when that is the only thing girls sell. They certainly don’t trade value or values or support one another in a moral way of living and loving.
What stops girls going on same-sex outings? The behaviour of other girls. The mendacities, the vacuousness, the bitchiness, the cattyness, the back-stabbing, the sheer banality of girls. What girl in her right mind would want a bunch of narcissistic princesses around her, stealing her sales pitch and diminishing the brilliance of the sparkles coming from her tiara.
“Are there ways to encourage boys to seek the company of chaste girls?”
There are too few chaste girls to make a market segment. Not even a niche. They are like organic tomatos, full of flaws and mishapen. They have no broad and deep morality to go with their chastity, which is nowadays more like a fashion accessory or a ‘dare’. Chasteness is faux when in a vacuum.
Get all the chaste girls together and tell them to fight for the salvation and rescue of the family, of men, of marriage. Get them to overthrow the myriad government anti-male edicts. Get them to overthrow the government of the wicked. They’d be too busy to screw around.
Too hard? Too big an ask? Then tough. Who gives a damn about them. Like all the other whining women who are otherwise silent about the destruction going on around them, that they have supported, that they benefit from at the expense of boys, men, babies, society, and do nothing to counter, let them get fucked.
July 16th, 2007 at 10:23 am
Denise — “How do we encourage them to find solace in solitary pursuits?
How do we encourage boys to seek the company of girls who won’t have sex?”
The stronger people, with the even strongly confidence and social moralities, have always naturally and simply displayed this understanding. No encouragement needed.
But the weaker people have never been able to do this, not even when given loads of encouragement.
July 16th, 2007 at 10:14 am
The Gonzman said,
Hmm. What to do, what to do?
Well, back before this problem was epidemic, we had such things as morality, shame, and consequence.
(Denise) Some teen girls are still chaste. However, like that letter-writer, they may find themselves bereft of male company. Gonzman, how do we get them to realize that “going to movies with girlfriends” isn’t second rate? Is there a way to convince them that a homosocial life is as good as a heterosocial one?
Some girls are lonely and might be tempted to have sex to have a social life. How do we encourage them to find solace in solitary pursuits?
How do we encourage boys to seek the company of girls who won’t have sex?
July 16th, 2007 at 10:04 am
Well, this is just stupid. Feminists equate promiscuity with equality and wonder why guys prefer the easy girls… for sex, not for marriage (or any serious monogamous long term relationship).
As someone suggested earlier, this a problem caused by feminists. Guys will start treating women with some respect when women act respectable.
July 16th, 2007 at 9:45 am
Im in this same predictament now. I just recently started dating this girl who is a 20 yr old virgin … Im okay with her choice BUT she has severe control issues. Everything has to be her way and perfect. Needless to say I doubt it will last long but there is pressure on me to act a certain way. And to engage in sexual intercourse, well, thats half the fun of a relationship! Makes up for the nagging.
July 16th, 2007 at 9:42 am
Hmm. What to do, what to do?
Well, back before this problem was epidemic, we had such things as morality, shame, and consequence.
But then the Liberal Secularist agenda came out and morality was so passe, shame a horrible thing we shouldn’t heap on women, and as far as consequences go, it “isn’t their fault” so we created social programs to allow them to escape those consequences.
You do the math.
July 16th, 2007 at 9:32 am
Wadestar said: I resent your closing question asking ‘boys’ to solve this problem. It isn’t their problem and, in fact, the problem has come from the women in our society.
(Denise) I didn’t ask boys to solve the problem. If girls have sex because they want the company of boys, then one way to approach this problem is to convince boys not to seek sex, not to accept it, and to seek the company of girls who will not have sex. Boys who seek female company but don’t seek or accept sexual favors are definitely part of the solution to the problems caused by sexual activity.
July 16th, 2007 at 9:28 am
Down with virginity!
Hello Denise (and all),
Saint Thomas Aquinas suggested the legalized prostitution went a long way in getting men to stop pressuring “nice girls” to have sex outside of marriage. He considered the institution (yes, the institution!) of prostitution as similar to a sewer: You don’t want one running through your living room, but without one the waste backs up into your main living area.
I don’t have anything against women going on same-sex outings and don’t think there ever was a social stigma against it. It was common in my day for girls to go out together especially to see a chick flick and boys would all get together for a night out of paintball or to see the latest Matrix film together. Nothing strange or anti-social about it. It gets wierd, though, when young women go out “stag” or in groups to the prom because they didn’t get asked out by boys. THAT’S like carrying a big sign that says: “I’m socially dysfunctional!” Not that makes them bad persons, but it’s a sign that society and themselves really need to get up to speed.
Finally, Denise, sure religion says both men and women should wait until marriage, blah blah blah but the REALITY is that men don’t use their sexuality as a bargaining tool so there’s no negative social feedback to a man “giving it away” for free. If anything, a man whose unmarried AND a virgin at the age of 40 (similar to the film of that title) is seen as a wierdo. I’ll even go so far as to say that women who are virgins into their 20’s waiting for the right man probably should have just lost it in the back seat of a buick in their teens for their own good. NOTHING scares off prospective gentlemen more than some woman in her late 20’s saying: “Oh, I’m a virgin BTW!” TOO much pressure and concern that she has sexual hangups. Of course, that’s different than the young woman sleeping around with losers at bars…
July 16th, 2007 at 9:27 am
Perhaps it’s like the haight ashbury hippies, we have to relearn what we once learned.
July 16th, 2007 at 9:25 am
How can we help chaste girls to have better social lives or to enjoy solitude?
America is the smut peddler of the world. In other countries such as the middle east such smut is not allowed to be published or broadcast and for good reason. In America anything goes. Homosexuality is legitamized, etc.
How can we help chaste girls when we live in a morally bankrupt country?
It all begins with having a level of morality much higher than we have now. Society kicked the bible and its moral teachings to the curb, because we are SO much smarter than God. The bible shows how and what happens when people do things their own way instead of Gods way? Do people ever learn? Doesn’t look like the do.
July 16th, 2007 at 8:50 am
Joi said,
The bible states that both men and women should wait until marriage; sex outside of marriage cheapens it.
(Denise) Sexual activity can lead to many serious social ills. It leads to unplanned pregnancies, about half of which end in morally troubling and grisly abortions. It leads to births of babies who are often ill cared for. It leads to the spread of sexually transmitted diseases.
In a previous essay, I asked how we could discourage sexual activity among adolescent boys. Now I’m asking a similar question regarding girls. Girls usually are sexual active for social reasons. How can we help chaste girls to have better social lives or to enjoy solitude?
July 16th, 2007 at 8:23 am
In the past *all* girls were encouraged to be caste and girls who slept around were rightly considered to be less then ideal as ‘mating’ material. In those days a girl who was socially adept or less attractive would, at least, not feel she was obliged to have sex to fit in. This also meant that, if you were a boy, you wouldn’t reject a girl (and you wouldn’t think less of her) because she wouldn’t sleep with you.
Sex is powerful and in the old world there were strict rules governing relationships and sex to the advantage of everyone.
With the new feminist philosopy all girls are encouraged to have sex as young and as often as possible. Sex is no longer an option it is the first tool a girls uses to get her way. So many girls now ‘put out’ that if you don’t you are considered a freak. To be shy or unattractive or a virgin is to be a freak. If you are a girl and consider yourself unattractive (and what adolescent doesn’t at one time or another) then, at least you can sleep around and eliminate *that* reason for being ostracized… and there is no social downside to doing it. It only destroys your own self-esteem… but that is a small price to pay to ‘fit in’.
I hate to say it but the religious right (and Muslims) are right on this one and it has profound implications for our culture. Society must treat woman as special and they need protection, but not the kind that feminists call for. Sex is powerful and the only way for society to control it is to treat it as a precious commodity that is not allowed to be overtly ‘used’ for control.
Once everyone realizes this is true (and, of course, that is not a given) it will necessarily lead to a society that greatly restricts women’s options than current society.
Of course, this is nothing new for men. Their lives have always been greatly restricted. Feminist see that they wield the ‘power’ in society and mistakenly think that means they have more freedom. In fact, it means, and always has meant, that they have the greater responsibility.
I resent your closing question asking ‘boys’ to solve this problem. It isn’t their problem and, in fact, the problem has come from the women in our society. When are women/feminists going to wake up and encourage girls to only have sex in marriage and accept the consequences of that decision?
July 16th, 2007 at 7:58 am
1.”Studies show that….”
That’s nice.
2.”…if anyone thinks such a lifestyle is a good one and that it can and should be brought into fashion, I’d welcome his or her suggestions.”
What, exactly, is the point here?
What’s the goal? Are previous “studies”, say, from the last 3000 years, not suitable?
July 16th, 2007 at 7:29 am
Girls want to go with guys because they want everything given to them on a platter and other girls are not going to give anything on a platter.
If girls should take pride in being with other girls, then they should first be made to take pride in living on their own effort and not getting a free lunch. They should be made to take pride in doing things on their own instead of getting someone else to do things for them. And they should be made to take pride in being self sufficient instead of dependent. But then the misandric society always likes to pamper women and torture men and it tells men to take pride in self torture and women to take pride in the torture of men.
July 16th, 2007 at 7:20 am
Hmmm,
There is no real answer to this.
The pretty ones always attract attention. Males naturally gravitate to pretty girls. She could be Attila the Hun for personality, as long as she’s pretty, there will always be men at her feet whether she is sexually active or not.
For those who are less attractive, I think that it is wise to counsel them about proper behavior with respect to dating and sex. Also to advise them that they will grow into an adult and being a teenager who is awkward is only a small part of their life. You only get one chance at a reputation.
So many girls that I recall from earlier in life, the really pretty ones got used up and at age 40 look like hell. The ones who were not popular, at age 40, still have something resembling their youth.
That is what I point out to my daughter and her friends.
July 16th, 2007 at 6:34 am
The bible states that both men and women should wait until marriage; sex outside of marriage cheapens it.