Opinions on your definition of sex and virginity

[AnandaMeansBliss]

I have been reading a lot of articles on the prevalence of oral sex in the teenage community lately. I have also recently befriended a few Christians that believe oral sex is not sex. I am wondering what INTJs (and others) think about this? To me, it seems that once there is any behavior that simulates sex, any sort of stimulation (especially with the intent of achieving orgasm), then virginity is lost. Also, sorry if this has been posted somewhere else, although I did not find anything when I searched the forums.

Is someone who is raped or molested no longer a virgin?

Is actual intercourse the only act that counts when determining ones virginity?

If you willingly engage in other intimate sexual acts but do not have intercourse, is it fair to still consider yourself a virgin?

How would you define losing your virginity if you were/are homosexual or bisexual?

Is being a virgin based on your feelings, what you do, or is it a combination of both?

Is there an emotional component to losing your virginity, meaning if you have sex but don't feel anything is different about you, does it count?

Is the current definition of virginity, and all the social stigma attached to it, biased toward girls? Is this right?
Does the current definition of virginity exclude homosexuals? Is this right?

Is virginity subjective (based on how the individual views themselves and what they do) or objective (how the situation is viewed by others on the outside)?

[Tarrick]

There's two sides to it in my opinion: Your mentality and technically. So, in order of your questions:

Questionable, but at least technically.

Consensual, then both.

Technically, yes...mentally, not so much.

Mentally you would not be.

(Been answered)

Wouldn't know, but at least technically.

Social stigma? Considering I am one, I could care. As for being bias...I wouldn't know.
2nd part: I don't think so. The experience would still remove the mental part.

In some ways, it's only measurable by your point of view, in others it's fairly cut and dry.

[xhaan]

vir·gin·i·ty (vr-jn-t)
n. pl. vir·gin·i·ties
1. The quality or condition of being a virgin.
2. The state of being pure, unsullied, or untouched.

As far as I'm concerned, it's hard to remain a virgin after puberty starts and things 'begin working'. This is why chastity belts were invented, IMO, to prevent this 'loss of purity', which is seen as a desirable thing (the purity, not the loss of it).

[Danisty]

I like to keep it simple. Did they have sex? If yes, they aren't virgins, if no, they are. As far as I'm concerned, sex is intercourse (vaginal or anal) and everything else is just foreplay. Of course, this is coming from someone who never valued virginity in the first place. In fact, I wanted to get rid of mine right away.

[Paul V]

I have been reading a lot of articles on the prevalence of oral sex in the teenage community lately. I have also recently befriended a few Christians that believe oral sex is not sex. I am wondering what INTJs (and others) think about this? To me, it seems that once there is any behavior that simulates sex, any sort of stimulation (especially with the intent of achieving orgasm), then virginity is lost. Also, sorry if this has been posted somewhere else, although I did not find anything when I searched the forums.

I have to agree. To me, virginity is lost when two consensual people engage in sexual gratification, whether it is mutual or one-sided.

Is someone who is raped or molested no longer a virgin?

Look at my definition above. "Consensual"

Is actual intercourse the only act that counts when determining ones virginity?

Nope. Sexual gratification comes in several forms.

If you willingly engage in other intimate sexual acts but do not have intercourse, is it fair to still consider yourself a virgin?

Nope. Same as above.

How would you define losing your virginity if you were/are homosexual or bisexual?

My definition remains unchanged.

Is being a virgin based on your feelings, what you do, or is it a combination of both?

Feelings do not matter in these cases. You cannot disguise the truth. I've heard my classmates say many times to their boyfriends/girlfriends: "I'm just as new in this as you are. I've had sex before, but I've never made love." Bollocks. You've done it, you've lost it.

Is there an emotional component to losing your virginity, meaning if you have sex but don't feel anything is different about you, does it count?

Read the above answer.

Is the current definition of virginity, and all the social stigma attached to it, biased toward girls? Is this right?

Yes. Parents who have children (at least in my country) impose the following behaviour on their children: If male, he must sleep with as many girls as he can. If he doesn't, he's probably gay and/or childish. If female, she must preserve her virginity until at least age of majority, if not until marriage. If she doesn't, she's a slut or a whore. You can imagine now the amount of confusion that reigns in the minds of the adolescents I'm doomed to share my existence with. The battle of wills between males and females is, however, short lived. Females have the disadvantage of having their own bodies plotting against their resolve, making them desire what they've been told they shouldn't have.

Does the current definition of virginity exclude homosexuals? Is this right?

Yes, because society does not know how to make them fit in their ancient separation of genders and roles. The main reason old people stand against homosexuality is because it utterly destroys the preconceived notion of the genders, generating a drastic change they're not willing to face.

Is virginity subjective (based on how the individual views themselves and what they do) or objective (how the situation is viewed by others on the outside)?

Objective, as I've stated at the beginning. Though there's probably an arguable point when it comes to consent. Peer pressure has been causing mayhem in adolescents' sexual lives.

[Danisty]

If virginity is based on sexual gratification, how does masturbation fit into this?

[Paul V]

If virginity is based on sexual gratification, how does masturbation fit into this?

It depends on whether you're doing it alone or if someone else is assisting. If it's the former, you're still a virgin. If it's the latter, you're not.

[Danisty]

It depends on whether you're doing it alone or if someone else is assisting. If it's the former, you're still a virgin. If it's the latter, you're not.What if two people are in a room together masturbating, but aren't helping each other? I'm interested in AnandaMeansBliss's opinion too since he didn't specify that others needed to be involved at all.

[Paul V]

What if two people are in a room together masturbating, but aren't helping each other? I'm interested in AnandaMeansBliss's opinion too since he didn't specify that others needed to be involved at all.

To me, neither loses their virginity.

But I'm also curious about AmandaMeansBliss' opinion on my definition. Perhaps she has something to add or something to challenge.

[robin.]

I have been reading a lot of articles on the prevalence of oral sex in the teenage community lately. I have also recently befriended a few Christians that believe oral sex is not sex. I am wondering what INTJs (and others) think about this? To me, it seems that once there is any behavior that simulates sex, any sort of stimulation (especially with the intent of achieving orgasm), then virginity is lost. Also, sorry if this has been posted somewhere else, although I did not find anything when I searched the forums.This is utter crap. I am a Christian, and I think this stuff is ridiculous. If you're going to abstain, you either do it right or you don't do it at all....(come to think of it, those should be reversed....:thinking:)

Anyway, I like your definition. Any kind of consensual stimulation done with another person for any kind of sexual pleasure = sex. So if you do that, you are no longer a virgin.

Is someone who is raped or molested no longer a virgin?No, not consensual. And oftentimes, this kind of abuse is an act of power, not of sex.

Is actual intercourse the only act that counts when determining ones virginity?No.

If you willingly engage in other intimate sexual acts but do not have intercourse, is it fair to still consider yourself a virgin?No.

How would you define losing your virginity if you were/are homosexual or bisexual?If it's consensual and it leads to sexual pleasure, then you're not a virgin anymore.

Is being a virgin based on your feelings, what you do, or is it a combination of both?I guess both, because although it does depend on what you do, it doesn't count if it's not consensual.

Is there an emotional component to losing your virginity, meaning if you have sex but don't feel anything is different about you, does it count?Yes, it counts. You obviously felt enough of a feeling to start doing it in the first place, and you consciously made the decision to do it. Fireworks or no, still not a virgin.

Is the current definition of virginity, and all the social stigma attached to it, biased toward girls? Is this right?Well, I don't think that my definition of virginity is biased toward either gender, but I certainly agree with Paul's comments on the unfortunately unequal effects it has on both genders.
Does the current definition of virginity exclude homosexuals? Is this right?I think that if you limit yourself and say that you only lose your virginity if Tab A goes into Slot B, then it seems like lesbians could never lose their virginities....but I think they can. You don't need a penis to have sex, and I think that our society sometimes loses sight of that.

Is virginity subjective (based on how the individual views themselves and what they do) or objective (how the situation is viewed by others on the outside)?I don't really know if I agree with your definition of objective, because different people have different views...which seems to be the epitome of subjectivity. But I get what you're saying...is there some objective standard by which you can judge a loss of virginity? I would say yes, which is the definition I stated in the beginning which seems to look like most of the other definitions here.

Oh and for the question about masturbating with someone else in the room....well....that's kind of tough. On one hand, it seems like it's basically just like a live version of porn, but it certainly seems more intimate than that. And, it's technically sex according to my definition.

Another question....what about cyber sex, or phone sex? I know a lot of people don't think they technically count even though they have the word sex in it...but I'm leaning towards them being sex, because it's still consensual stimulation done between people with the purpose of sexual pleasure.

[AnandaMeansBliss]

What if two people are in a room together masturbating, but aren't helping each other? I'm interested in AnandaMeansBliss's opinion too since he didn't specify that others needed to be involved at all.

Yea, that is interesting. I think when you start simulating sex with another person then you lose your virginity, especially unclothed i.e. revealed genitals in someway. I do not think the sole criterion is sexual gratification. Two people masturbating in the same room, on the same bed, nudity...? Now if there is nudity involved, the lines are certainly blurred. But your virginity is still intact...I supposed you are now more or less a half-virgin (demivierge)To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.





AnandaMeansBliss added to this post, 58 minutes and 16 seconds later...


Another question....what about cyber sex, or phone sex? I know a lot of people don't think they technically count even though they have the word sex in it...but I'm leaning towards them being sex, because it's still consensual stimulation done between people with the purpose of sexual pleasure.

I really don't think that strict phone sex and cyber sex is sex. Even if there is masturbation. There is no physical contact. Phone sex and cyber just seem like masturbation to me.

[rwyatt365]

IMO "having sex" is any act where stimulation is used to "incite" (excite?) a sexual response (intentional, or not). That is sufficiently vague to cover a wide range of activities and/or circumstances. "Virginity" is the state prior to an individual ever having "had sex". Once again,, vague and open to interpretation.

In response to your questions;
Is someone who is raped or molested no longer a virgin? According to the definitions; yes, they are no longer a virgin.

Is actual intercourse the only act that counts when determining ones virginity? No, other (so-called) sexual acts "count".

If you willingly engage in other intimate sexual acts but do not have intercourse, is it fair to still consider yourself a virgin? No. Let me pose an analogy; if I take a brand-new car off the dealer showroom and put it on a dynamometer, then drive it for 1000 miles on that dyno – is the car "new"? Would you buy it for the full new-car price?

How would you define losing your virginity if you were/are homosexual or bisexual? However I could ;)

Is being a virgin based on your feelings, what you do, or is it a combination of both? Virginity is a state of being, independent of "feelings". One may proclaim that they "feel just like a virgin", but if they have "had sex" then they are no longer a virgin.

Is there an emotional component to losing your virginity, meaning if you have sex but don't feel anything is different about you, does it count? No, but nice try! :thumbsup:

Is the current definition of virginity, and all the social stigma attached to it, biased toward girls? Is this right? The definition (in my book), no. The stigma, absolutely! Society says; virgin girl = good, virgin boy = anomaly.

Does the current definition of virginity exclude homosexuals? Is this right? No, and yes.

Is virginity subjective (based on how the individual views themselves and what they do) or objective (how the situation is viewed by others on the outside)? Virginity should be objective but is often (incorrectly) treated as subjective.

On the subject of masturbation - in my book; yes - that's "having sex" as well. The absense of a partner is not exclusionary.

[Danisty]

I think that if you limit yourself and say that you only lose your virginity if Tab A goes into Slot B, then it seems like lesbians could never lose their virginities....but I think they can. You don't need a penis to have sex, and I think that our society sometimes loses sight of that.Actually that would mean gay men couldn't lose their virginity either since their Tab A is going into slot C.

Another question....what about cyber sex, or phone sex? I know a lot of people don't think they technically count even though they have the word sex in it...but I'm leaning towards them being sex, because it's still consensual stimulation done between people with the purpose of sexual pleasure.If you're not sure about two people masturbating in the same room, how can you be sure about two people sitting in different rooms masturbating at the same time? Is masturbation sex or not?

IMO "having sex" is any act where stimulation is used to "incite" (excite?) a sexual response (intentional, or not). That is sufficiently vague to cover a wide range of activities and/or circumstances. "Virginity" is the state prior to an individual ever having "had sex". Once again,, vague and open to interpretation. It's so vague it includes touching other people. :huh: If my husband kisses me on the back of the neck, are we having sex?

On the subject of masturbation - in my book; yes - that's "having sex" as well. The absense of a partner is not exclusionary.I'd like to see how you're going to make this definition work considering children are known to masturbate before they are even born.

[rwyatt365]

It's so vague it includes touching other people. If my husband kisses me on the back of the neck, are we having sex?
True enough, it is vague. And there will be any number of cases that would reduce it to ineffectiveness. That's where the nit-pickers would have to come in and dissect every instance. In the case of you and your husband…if he does that and you get horny as a result, then yes, you had sex (or soon will be ;) ).
I'd like to see how you're going to make this definition work considering children are known to masturbate before they are even born.
Same thing as above…but to the case given, I would rule that in-vitro masturbation is excluded.

The point is that any label attached to a definition can be reduced to absurdity given an infinite number of circumstances, so screw the label ("virginity") and forge on with life. My true position on virginity is that it is over-rated and insubstantial – I was more concerned with whether I could "connect" with a girl than whether she was a virgin or not. It was more important that she would "do me", than whether she had "done it". :thumbsup:

[Danisty]

True enough, it is vague. And there will be any number of cases that would reduce it to ineffectiveness. That's where the nit-pickers would have to come in and dissect every instance. In the case of you and your husband…if he does that and you get horny as a result, then yes, you had sex (or soon will be ;) ). We better be!

Same thing as above…but to the case given, I would rule that in-vitro masturbation is excluded.Okay, so by your definition I lost my virginity no later than the age of 4 (since I can remember masturbating at least that young.

The point is that any label attached to a definition can be reduced to absurdity given an infinite number of circumstances, so screw the label ("virginity") and forge on with life. My true position on virginity is that it is over-rated and insubstantial – I was more concerned with whether I could "connect" with a girl than whether she was a virgin or not. It was more important that she would "do me", than whether she had "done it". :thumbsup:Now that I can go along with. Personally, I find virginity to have no value whatsoever. There are so many more important things to consider than whether or not a person has had sex (no matter how you define it). If the point of your definition was to reduce everyone to a non-virgin, I dig it. ;D

[richirare]

My opinion is that you can lose virginity both physically and mentally; I first had oral sex with both genres at 10 but I chose to postpone vaginal penetration until I got a girlfriend, and I consider I mentally lost my virginity at that moment. To me physical virginity is lost whenever a penetration (vaginal, anal or oral) is made not in form of masturbation, but with a partner/s (man-woman, man-man, woman-woman). Also I think there is a mental virginity that deals with the perception the mind has from that first experience. So mental virginity is lost when the mind is capable of comprehension of the emotional events that take place (any emotional process, like love, fear, angish (if its a rape), or similar, because kids fooling around might know how to penetrate but not how to emotionally react to that, which was my case).

[rwyatt365]

We better be!
You go girl!!
Okay, so by your definition I lost my virginity no later than the age of 4 (since I can remember masturbating at least that young.
Damn, I can't even remember being 4! And I don't remember discovering my penis until I was 8 or 9!
Now that I can go along with. Personally, I find virginity to have no value whatsoever. There are so many more important things to consider than whether or not a person has had sex (no matter how you define it). If the point of your definition was to reduce everyone to a non-virgin, I dig it. ;D
...you got it! My first post was to play the devil's advocate. If we can eliminate this whole "virgin"=good thing, humanity would be further along. Better to teach personal responsibility than to fret over who gets laid (or not).

[Danisty]

Damn, I can't even remember being 4! And I don't remember discovering my penis until I was 8 or 9!From talking to friends and people on forums, etc., I've found the girls usually start masturbating before boys. It's not a scientific survey by any means, but most of the women I know started at a younger age. I wouldn't be surprised if this was widespread. Most of the women I know also think about sex at least as much as men.

[rwyatt365]

From talking to friends and people on forums, etc., I've found the girls usually start masturbating before boys. It's not a scientific survey by any means, but most of the women I know started at a younger age. I wouldn't be surprised if this was widespread. Most of the women I know also think about sex at least as much as men.
*sigh* Yeah, I didn't find that out until later in life too. :embarassed:

[terencec]

*sigh* Yeah, I didn't find that out until later in life too. :embarassed:

I did not but if you had found out, what would you have done?

IMO, love and sex is inseparable for most girls. So, they have to love a guy to have sex with the guy. It does not matter if the girls want sex as much as guys because most of them will do have sex with any random guy. Sex and love for most men is different. I don't have to love the girl to have sex.

[Danisty]

I did not but if you had found out, what would you have done?

IMO, love and sex is inseparable for most girls. So, they have to love a guy to have sex with the guy. It does not matter if the girls want sex as much as guys because most of them will do have sex with any random guy. Sex and love for most men is different. I don't have to love the girl to have sex.I completely disagree with this stereotype. It may be inseparable for some girls, but I don't think it's anywhere near most.

[terencec]

I completely disagree with this stereotype. It may be inseparable for some girls, but I don't think it's anywhere near most.

This is my observation.

1. If you ask a guy to have sex with a very pretty/young girl when they just meet "a minutes ago". Most guys will do. They don't need to know/love the girl to have sex.

2. If you ask a girl to have sex with a stranger (good looking or not), most girls don't. They need to know the guy better before they have sex (maybe by small talk or make her laugh etc)

Anyway, it is only my observation and my theory and I don't say it must be correct since I have no prove.

If I ask some girls at the coffee shop/mall/theater/airport/bar/club etc who don't know me to have sex, they agree without even thinking. My theory will be totally wrong. This is one way to prove how wrong my theory it is. I never have done it yet!

[Danisty]

If you ask a guy to have sex with a very pretty/young girl when they just meet "a minutes ago". Most guys will do. They don't need to know/love the girl to have sex.I think most is too strong of a word here too. I don't doubt that many guys will, but I don't think it's most. If it is most, it's by a small margin.

If you ask a girl to have sex with a stranger (good looking or not), most girls don't. They need to know the guy better before they have sex (maybe by small talk or make her laugh etc)You mean things that can be done in a matter of minutes? I've found out that an overwhelming number of women I've talked to say that they know within minutes whether or not they will have sex with a guy. Just because the act doesn't happen immediately doesn't mean they haven't already silently made the decision. I think more times than not, the reason a woman doesn't have sex right away is because she doesn't know how to approach the subject. The women who make it known that they want to have sex with a man right away are often quickly rejected. Men who otherwise showed an interest and might even suggest having sex right away suddenly develop a negative opinion about her. These aren't just men who wouldn't have sex with a woman they barely know. Do you have any idea how many downright slutty guys I've met who won't have sex with a woman who's direct about wanting to have sex with them? Women aren't playing the same game as men because the game is a double-standard. It's not a lack of desire.

What I find especially interesting in your post is how you describe the women a guy might want to have sex with right away as a person he doesn't know very well, but the guy a woman might not want to have sex with right away is a stranger. You're not actually using the same scenario.

Overall, I don't think there are such extremes. I think that the percentage of men and women who would have sex with someone they barely know is roughly the same and only seems imbalanced because of what people express or avoid expressing due to social expectations. On top of that, I don't think each person is so extreme. Why does it have to be a matter of having sex right away and waiting a really long time? Most people are somewhere in the middle. I think defining "right away" as a matter of minutes is a bit extreme for either sex to actually do the deed. The difference is only that men will look at a woman they don't know and make his intentions known to everyone and women will look at man they don't know and make their intentions known to their girlfriends because if the men find out, they run.

[terencec]

What I find especially interesting in your post is how you describe the women a guy might want to have sex with right away as a person he doesn't know very well, but the guy a woman might not want to have sex with right away is a stranger. You're not actually using the same scenario.


I tried to make it the same scenario (i.e. they have not talked to each other yet, they just see each other.). Because English is not my native language, I might not. (If you consider "one minute" can know someone at all besides the name, that is not the same scenario. You can make it the same scenario and I will not change my theory.)

IMO, most women are not "visual" but men are (That is why so many porno for men, but not many for women. On the other hand, there are so many beauty magazines for girls but not many for men.) Most men can turn on, agree to have sex by pretty/sexy/young women just by "looking" (without even knowing them). Most women can not. So men have to talk to them. I believe most women do not want to have sex with men just by "looking" without "knowing+(interest or love)". (I cannot prove. Just my believe right now)

I tried to make it extreme so it is easy to see. If you have your theory, that is fine. I do believe your theory is one of the reasons. There are other reasons. But I believe mine is the major (subjectively, since we both cannot prove, I prefer my theory to yours.) until I get more information to prove it is wrong..

[Danisty]

I tried to make it the same scenario (i.e. they have not talked to each other yet, they just see each other.). Because English is not my native language, I might not. (If you consider "one minute" can know someone at all besides the name, that is not the same scenario. You can make it the same scenario and I will not change my theory.)I think my point still stands. By using different words when describing the men and women, you are showing a subtle judgment, perhaps even subconsciously. In fact, I would bet on it being subconscious.

IMO, most women are not "visual" but men are (That is why so many porno for men, but not many for women. On the other hand, there are so many beauty magazines for girls but not many for men.) Most men can turn on, agree to have sex by pretty/sexy/young women just by "looking" (without even knowing them). Most women can not. So men have to talk to them. I believe most women do not want to have sex with men just by "looking" without "knowing+(interest or love)". (I cannot prove. Just my believe right now)Why do you see things so black and white? What on earth is "most women are not visual" supposed to mean? And please, for everyone's sake, don't talk to women because we need you to.

I tried to make it extreme so it is easy to see. If you have your theory, that is fine. I do believe your theory is one of the reasons. There are other reasons. But I believe mine is the major (subjectively, since we both cannot prove, I prefer my theory to yours.) until I get more information to prove it is wrong..Well, as an admin on an all-female forum and a member of a military spouse support forum (which is made up primarily of women), I have heard things that you probably have not had the opportunity to hear. Women love sex, they love porn, they can get turned on in a second just at the site of a good looking man, they are adventurous and most of them find that they are the ones to initiate sex with a partner. They have the same sexual needs as men and are no more interested in love than men. When they are in an accepting environment, they are extraordinarily frank about their needs and desires and definitely aren't "proper" about expressing them. I've heard confessions of one-night stands and flings and booty calls and any number of other things that men get to brag about but women traditionally have to keep under wraps. The sexes aren't so different when it comes to sex itself.

[terencec]

Well, as an admin on an all-female forum and a member of a military spouse support forum (which is made up primarily of women), I have heard things that you probably have not had the opportunity to hear. Women love sex, they love porn, they can get turned on in a second just at the site of a good looking man, they are adventurous and most of them find that they are the ones to initiate sex with a partner. They have the same sexual needs as men and are no more interested in love than men. When they are in an accepting environment, they are extraordinarily frank about their needs and desires and definitely aren't "proper" about expressing them. I've heard confessions of one-night stands and flings and booty calls and any number of other things that men get to brag about but women traditionally have to keep under wraps. The sexes aren't so different when it comes to sex itself.

If so, I don't know why there are so many porn for men and not are for women (go to Borders or B&N to count how many porn magazines are for men and how many are for women. Just google to see if most of them are for men.). There are so many beauty magazines are for women and not many are for men. There are so many cosmetic for women and not many are for men. Many strip clubs are for men and not many are for women etc (if you see what I mean!)

Whatever you like to say. I cannot see what supports your claim by just a forum you read. My friend went to S&M club, he saw some 300/400lb, old, ugly women. They all very love sex. They even held my friend hand to their private parts when they first met and my friend almost threw up. Can I say all women love sex because of his experience?

I will not reply to you anymore because you really do not make sense to me. If you like to win the arguments, you should argue with some strong reasons. I stop here and let you continue whatever you like to say and claim your prize.

[Danisty]

If so, I don't know why there are so many porn for men and not are for women (go to Borders or B&N to count how many porn magazines are for men and how many are for women. Just google to see if most of them are for men.). There are so many beauty magazines are for women and not many are for men. There are so many cosmetic for women and not many are for men. Many strip clubs are for men and not many are for women etc (if you see what I mean!)I really don't understand what you're getting at. What do you mean by "porn for men" and "porn for women"? Porn is porn. It's pictures of people having sex. We just look at porn. It doesn't need to have a big pink ribbon on it or anything. I'm really also not at all clear on why you keep bringing up beauty magazines. What does the lack of cosmetics for men have to do with how much women want sex?

Whatever you like to say. I cannot see what supports your claim by just a forum you read. My friend went to S&M club, he saw some 400lb, old, ugly women. They all very love sex. They even held my friend hand to their private parts when they first met and my friend almost threw up. Can I say all women love sex because of his experience?What exactly supports your claim? You haven't offered anything other than repeating what you think women want. I've at least been specific with what I've experienced as a woman who's spent time talking to other women.

I will not reply to you anymore because you really do not make sense to me. If you like to win the arguments, you should argue with some strong reasons. I stop here and let you continue whatever you like to say and claim your prize.I really wish I could figure you out. So far in this thread you are the one who hasn't given any solid reasons. You haven't actually disputed anything I've said. All you've done is say that you are right because publishers don't make beauty magazines for men and there's supposed to be some kind of special porn for women that you don't see at the bookstore. I don't know if we're having a language problem, a culture problem, an age problem or what. I really wish you would talk it out with me, but every time we have a disconnect, you want to run away.

[xhaan]

I haven't quite read though the subsequent posts from my last...

But I gather we've redefined virginity from what it 'used to mean'.
Consensus apparently was (back in the 'dark ages' I suppose...)
Raped: lost virginity.
Masturbated: lost virginity.
Touched in a sexual way: lost virginity (but that one's hard to prove)
Had actual intercourse: lost virginity.

As I said before, this is why they made chastity belts, with locks, and some had SPIKES on them, to make it painful to try and get around the belt for someone else, or for the person to try to use the belt itself for gratification. (for crying out loud, SPIKES! Holy crap)

There were also male and female versions, they weren't for women only.

But anyway, virginity is just a concept, hell, it's just a word.
I tend to pay it no mind, because it's a bit antiquated. What counts is, if it matters to you whether or not a person 'slept around', whether or not they may have VD, whether or not they were exploited or taken advantage of... the list goes on. I don't think 'virginity' is exactly quantifiable anymore.

[terencec]

I really don't understand what you're getting at. What do you mean by "porn for men" and "porn for women"? Porn is porn. It's pictures of people having sex. We just look at porn. It doesn't need to have a big pink ribbon on it or anything. I'm really also not at all clear on why you keep bringing up beauty magazines. What does the lack of cosmetics for men have to do with how much women want sex?
.

This is my last reply. You need to "think" about my questions and you will see what I mean. If not, I will not tell you step by step what I mean. I don't know why you expect that level of explanation.

Porn magazine for women: Focus on men bodies/faces (E.g. Playgirls)
Porn magazine for men: Focus on women bodies/faces (E.g. Playboys)

If you think playgirls and playboys are for same audiences, that is fine for me!

Is this the best you can reply? If so, I am disappointed. You can say I am running away because I am. What you tell me does not make sense so I don't know how to reply.

If I am not right, you have to make me see it. You have not and just say something which is not relevant.

You need to find another guy to talk to you because I could not! Since this is INTJ forum, I still respect other people views even I have no idea what they try to tell me. In other forum, I will not!

[xhaan]

This is my last reply. You need to "think" about my questions and you will see what I mean. If not, I will not tell you step by step what I mean. I don't know why you expect that level of explanation.

Porn magazine for women: Focus on men bodies/faces (E.g. Playgirls)
Porn magazine for men: Focus on women bodies/faces (E.g. Playboys)

If you think playgirls and playboys are for same audiences, that is fine for me!


They are for whoever likes to read them, I am certain.
I've known women who like what you consider to be 'man porn', and men who like what you consider to be 'women porn'.
I wonder what lesbian porn is. Is that man porn, or women porn?

This reminds me of this funny dating service commercial, where this guy is reading a Playboy mag, and he's looking at it so intently for a while... then he suddenly closes it, and says "Nope, still gay."

[Danisty]

This is my last reply. You need to "think" about my questions and you will see what I mean. If not, I will not tell you step by step what I mean. I don't know why you expect that level of explanation.

Porn magazine for women: Focus on men bodies/faces (E.g. Playgirls)
Porn magazine for men: Focus on women bodies/faces (E.g. Playboys)

If you think playgirls and playboys are for same audiences, that is fine for me!

Is this the best you can reply? If so, I am disappointed. You can say I am running away because I am. What you tell me does not make sense so I don't know how to reply.

You need to find another guy to talk to you because I could not! Since this INTJ forum, I still respect other people views even I have no idea what they are talking about. In other forum, I will not!Trust me, I am at least equally confused! I haven't understood most of your points. I mean, I've understand what you have said, but I don't understand what I'm supposed to be getting out of it. I'd really rather try to work on our communication, but if you don't want to, I obviously can't force you.

For the record, I understand what you are getting at by saying Playboy or Playgirl and I understood that from the beginning, but my point was what something is marketed as doesn't necessarily translate out to their purpose. I'm trying to figure out if you can see that before I have to spell it out.

[xhaan]

Whatever you like to say. I cannot see what supports your claim by just a forum you read. My friend went to S&M club, he saw some 300/400lb, old, ugly women. They all very love sex. They even held my friend hand to their private parts when they first met and my friend almost threw up. Can I say all women love sex because of his experience?


No, you can't. But you can't say that none do either.
Ever heard of default logic?

Hell, in some cultures, it's believed that women are MORE sexual than men. Some go so far as to cut out the sexual parts of females, to prevent this percieved 'tendency'.

[Hdier]

Is someone who is raped or molested no longer a virgin?

Yes. Virginity is physical, not mental.

Is actual intercourse the only act that counts when determining ones virginity?

I'm not sure what's included in intercourse, but I would say that oral, anal, or vaginal sex causes a loss of virginity.

If you willingly engage in other intimate sexual acts but do not have intercourse, is it fair to still consider yourself a virgin?

See the above response.

How would you define losing your virginity if you were/are homosexual or bisexual?

Again, oral, anal, or vaginal.

Is being a virgin based on your feelings, what you do, or is it a combination of both?

Physical. Purely physical.

Is there an emotional component to losing your virginity, meaning if you have sex but don't feel anything is different about you, does it count?

No then yes, respectively.

Is the current definition of virginity, and all the social stigma attached to it, biased toward girls? Is this right?
Does the current definition of virginity exclude homosexuals? Is this right?

What's the 'current definition'? Mine doesn't.

Is virginity subjective (based on how the individual views themselves and what they do) or objective (how the situation is viewed by others on the outside)?

Huh? You can be objective about yourself, and others can be subjective about you.

[danalaina]

I really don't think that strict phone sex and cyber sex is sex. Even if there is masturbation. There is no physical contact. Phone sex and cyber just seem like masturbation to me.

i tend to find dithering over this whole topic a little tiresome for some reason, but i have to disagree with you here.

the moment you involve another person who can actually respond to you (meaning not a video or magazine or whatever), it's sex. it might not be the fabulous sex most of us want, but it's sex.

if all sex had no emotional component at all and were a result only of direct physical stimulation, i might agree with you. the brain is too involved for this to be the case.





danalaina added to this post, 1 minutes and 19 seconds later...

Porn magazine for women: Focus on men bodies/faces (E.g. Playgirls)


i don't think this magazine really exists for women. just sayin'. ;)