The premise of this address would be like ...jumping off a building and pretending that gravity doesn't exist. You simply cannot dismiss or deny the fact that - since the beginning of time - virgins have always had more 'value' to the male gender than their non-virgin sisters. *BOGGLE*

Male arrogance?

I call it male confidence.

And excellence. And anyone who disagrees is obviously just jealous!

I suppose I didn't think of it that way. I have trouble telling when something is being chauvinistic or not.

Guys have a very un-PC path to navigate. On one hand we're supposed to be men; confident, assertive, powerful, etc. On the other hand those things are bad and put women down. And men aren't supposed to be bad. Or maybe we are. I don't know. Eventually I'm just going to give up and just be a bad guy. It's so much easier and pretty much all my friends have already given up. I'm just stubborn, I guess.

And yes, that is me disagreeing. Obviously guys don't avoid virgins. If they did how would there be non-virgins? Last I checked they came from virgins sleeping with guys who are sleeping with a virgin at the time. Duh.

Mostly what I've been reading in this thread is that virginity is something we'd prefer to avoid. How does that have anything to do with its sacredness? How is that controlling women and their sexuality if we're more comfortable with women who are already comfortable with their sexuality? Isn't this exactly the opposite of what you're accusing us of?

We're not saying our sexual prowess is going to unhinge a virgin. We're saying that there are many people in our society who put a heavy burden upon virginity. Mothers still tell their daughters that the first time is special and they should "save" it for the right guy, don't they? So when women "lose" that virginity she has all these societal preconceptions about it. Men, on the other hand, are encouraged to lose it (and in many cultures it's practically a coming-of-age ritual).

The "destruction" of her social fabric is what unhinges a female virgin, not our incredible sexual powers. Now she has pressure on herself that this guy has to be "the one," she has guilt if it was an accident or part of the moment and now she considers herself "dirty" and sleeps with every guy she can, etc. You can talk about the Evil Patriarchy all you want but ultimately these things are not something the average guy pushes onto women. More likely those things were taught to her by her mother (who, of course, was brainwashed by the Patriarchy...ugh).

As for older virgins generally speaking people are not virgins long after their 30s and 40s. It's very rare and it has always been very rare. Married couples are generally not virgins. Historically most people get married (and used to get married much earlier, further decreasing the likelihood of older virgins). And those who didn't were looked at with even more suspicion than people today.

So when you see an older virgin you have to ask yourself why for both genders. Are they someone deeply religious (or whatever) who's waiting for the right person? Are they just bad at relationships? Are they antisocial? It doesn't have to be a bad reason but the longer time goes on the likelihood of someone not forming a deep enough relationship with the opposite sex to have intercourse gets lower and lower. Once you get into the late 40s and 50s people are generally married. And in the process probably not virgins. It's not a Patriarchal Conspiracy, it's statistics.

And women do the same thing to try and make a guy's first time a good one. I've talked to plenty of women who are concerned with have sex with a virgin because they are worried about his awkwardness, worried that he'll be too nervous, etc. I would think it's more likely a virgin guy would have trouble in relationships than a virgin girl.

The guys are just saying that they would want a girl's first time to be special, not just spontaneous "in the moment" sex. Something she's sure she wants. This is taking her feelings into account, not trying to control her. It's not a favor, it's respect and concern.

Ugh. Maybe I should just go with the whole bad guy thing. I am, after all, a White Male, the Source of All Things Wrong With The World. I could just lie and say I hate women and all other races besides my own (whatever that is) and I wouldn't have to play the apologetic monster trying to fight against my evil animal instincts.

Unfortunately I'm not willing to give up that easily. Because I'm arrogant, of course!

Jacquesne

My second-last paragraph came from my first real paragraph starting with "Guys have a very un-PC path..."

Thank you. That makes a bit more sense, in that context.

It was a direct response to "the sacredness of women's virginity says a lot about its role in society: controlling women and their sexuality." and "Anyone else hearing a ton of male arrogance in this thread?" If I read the first sentence in context of the second one I read this as implying "men's attitude towards a woman's virginity is designed to control women and their sexuality." Am I correct so far?

I think that there's very much an argument to be made...maybe the "sacredness" of virginity was a bad choice of words, but the desirability. I'm going to jump to your argument on birth control being responsibility for this phenomenon; the evidence that I've seen doesn't seem to support it. Virginity was desirable long before birth control, and even in traditional cultures where birth control isn't used; it's not a female construction, it's a patriarchal construction: Women have to be virgins when they married, men get a free ride (so to speak). I'm sorry if that reminds you of the language of your Women's Studies days; I admit that some of that language can be anti-men, and that's not a branch of feminism that I really believe in or endorse. If my post came across like that, I owe you an apology as well, but it doesn't change the fact that it was a group of men (not you; men a long time ago) that decided that virginity was something to be valued in a woman.

So I disagreed with this in quite some detail and disagreed that men are trying to control women and drew the conclusion, based on context, that you believe men controlling women is a bad thing (which I agree with).

I don't think it's a matter of control; I think it's a matter of the assumption that a sexually inexperienced woman needs to be protected from the potential emotional consequences of making a decision to have sex. Virgins aren't automatically going to be "swept away" into making a decision when the time might not be "right" for them; and so what if they are? She is a woman deciding to have sex. It's useful for the man to know, as she might experience some physical discomfort, but couldn't any woman?

So if we, by our responses, are arrogant and controlling, and these things are bad, therefore we are bad. If A=B and B=C then A=C, right?

You are not bad. Men are not bad. I dislike that line of feminist thinking immensely. Men have been part of a lot of social forces that have conspired to keep women from being treated as people with rights, but women have been part of those forces too. But that's another thread.

Perhaps I did put words in your mouth. I may have been having flashbacks to my Gender and Society class where your post was used almost word for word except the word "patriarchy" was used more often. I do apologize for arguing against what I perceived to be your position rather than perhaps what it actually is.

Apology accepted.

This was my summary of your response in my head that I was responding to, to clarify..."Society, and the men who control it, perpetuate the 'value' of virginity because they want to maintain control over female sexuality. So what I'm hearing in this thread from arrogant men is that they are saying that they cause women to lose control by having sex with a virgin, that older female virgins must be 'broken' somehow, and that the men are saying sex is a 'gift' to women."

Again, I don't think it's about control, I think it's about assumptions. And I think the assumptions did have a tone of arrogance to them, yes. You were not the only one that I was referring to in that post.

This read to me like men are at fault for her behavior and we think women's behavior revolves around us. This is what I was arguing against.

You, or any other man, is not at fault for anyone's behaviour. People are responsible for their own actions - that's part of my argument, really. Why assume that a virgin is not ready for sex and avoid her on that basis? Obviously not all men are doing this, but we saw evidence in this thread that some would...

Perhaps the part where I stated that you implied men were bad is false and, if saying we are controlling and arrogant is indeed not an insult, I take those statements back and apologize. Intent is often difficult to read through text and I make (a lot of) mistakes.

I make mistakes too, and apologize for any way that I misread what you were saying. I appreciate you clearing things up.

The rest, however, I stand by. The sacredness of virginity is constructed...by women, for women, as a throwback to times when birth control was unavailable and losing your virginity meant the real risk of pregnancy and all the responsibility that entailed. Protecting virginity and valuing it has much more importance for women than men. Which is why we're saying we'd prefer non-virgins.

We're going to have to agree to disagree on this one. ;-)

Likewise virginity after a certain age is more of a stigma for men than women. Men have a lot of social pressure to be sexually active. An older woman virgin is perhaps "saving herself," a noble cause. An older man is more likely a social misfit who other women rejected. I'm not making these stereotypes up and I don't see how this stigma is against women in particular as you implied.

Ever heard, "She must be frigid"? "Knock-kneed"? Take a look at the spinster stereotype, or the female librarian stereotype. I'm not making these up either. I'm not denying that the male stereotypes are out there, and I'm sure they're hard to overcome as well...but females do feel the stigma too.

And saying that being sensitive to a woman and making sure she is comfortable with losing her virginity before getting caught up in passion and having her regret it is somehow us being arrogant and pretentious is also false, as I said before and other posters have said. This last one is what made me draw the conclusion that your position is that men are the "bad guys" here and led directly to my first and final paragraphs. It didn't come out of nowhere. After all, how else could you have come to the conclusion that men had bad intentions by being cautious? The idea that we would do it for her didn't seem to factor into it.

The assumptions are arrogant. I've been reading your posts since I got here, and you're not an arroganr person. Or a bad guy. I've seen very few people on these boards that I'd call either of those things. The idea that you'd do it for her is very nice, yes...but did she ask for it? Or are you acting on a stereotype of a female virgin?

She's just another woman who has agreed to have sex.

I don't mean to be patronizing. I do find that an interesting choice of words after my use of "patriarchy." If I misunderstood you then I really am sorry; I don't like putting words in people's mouth or misinterpreting them if I can help it. Those are the conclusions I drew based on what you wrote and the context of it being a response to what I wrote. I've tried to explain how I came to those conclusions.

Thanks. It's been interesting.

It's not a place for you Trixie....there's also drink there that never makes you drunk. Now where's the point in that? Every religion has its interesting aspects to say the least....I know, I've studied them....BTW people who were married in life meet up with their spouses in the beyond and don't get this sweet deal....and you know I am going to remember the last argument I had with my hypothetical EH matched husband because I don't like to let things go and I really like to be right but that is a story for another thread I think