Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So, you made up your own idea of what Medieval marriage is and then expected us to understand what you are talking about?
Here's the thing - your posts are illogical. You seem to think that if someone has had sex with anyone before entering a relationship that it is hypocritical to then want a monogamous relationship. This doesn't make any sense. At all. You also seem to feel that sex is something dirty and bad - you keep equating sex to smoking, drinking, and gambling. That is probably going to be a problem for you if you ever decide to have sex. Most people want to find a person to spend their life with in a monogamous relationship. Some people want open relationships. Some people would rather be alone. None of this needs to be dictated by how many people someone has slept with. Also, boredom in a relationship or falling out of love has nothing to do with previous partners. Each relationship is it's own entity.
"Your posts make no sense". "Your posts are illogical". That's plain harassment for the fact that it implies that other interlocutor should act as if he suffers from inferiority complex - trying to elaborate everything in order to have sympathy or approval from You. At the same time, you answer with one-liners to counter it. Your opinion isn't supreme to mine.
Once again: I can't imagine myself being sexually exclusive with a woman who has behaved in a "certain way". I can't imagine myself restraining my sexual desires to appease someone who didn't restrain herself prior to meet me. I actually think that it'd be a huge challenge, much bigger than current challenge to avoid indulging in having casual sex while unattached. Many men may tell me otherwise but I've seen this with lots of Americans in well-established careers - they just resort to having affairs and hiring escorts on journeys because they apply the same way their wives do - "it's none of her business, but I know she'll ditch me out of family home if she finds out so I'll have affairs without her knowing".
I guess one's opinion is formed not only on their history but on their options, thus my view is different from a view of someone else.
Rest of it isn't worth mentioning. It's a mere construct and putting words in my mouth. I've elaborated my points well in previous posts, if you aren't willing to read, then don't hit the "reply button" to twist my words.
"Your posts make no sense". "Your posts are illogical". That's plain harassment for the fact that it implies that other interlocutor should act as if he suffers from inferiority complex - trying to elaborate everything in order to have sympathy or approval from You. At the same time, you answer with one-liners to counter it. Your opinion isn't supreme to mine.
Once again: I can't imagine myself being sexually exclusive with a woman who has behaved in a "certain way". I can't imagine myself restraining my sexual desires to appease someone who didn't restrain herself prior to meet me. I actually think that it'd be a huge challenge, much bigger than current challenge to avoid indulging in having casual sex while unattached. Many men may tell me otherwise but I've seen this with lots of Americans in well-established careers - they just resort to having affairs and hiring escorts on journeys because they apply the same way their wives do - "it's none of her business, but I know she'll ditch me out of family home if she finds out so I'll have affairs without her knowing".
I guess one's opinion is formed not only on their history but on their options, thus my view is different from a view of someone else.
Rest of it isn't worth mentioning. It's a mere construct and putting words in my mouth. I've elaborated my points well in previous posts, if you aren't willing to read, then don't hit the "reply button" to twist my words.
It's not harassment. It's difficult to "argue" with you because your idea of sex and what it means in a relationship doesn't make sense to most of us. I'm sorry if you feel harassed or inferior. That is not my intent. My intent is to point out to you that you don't seem to have a grasp of what sex and relationships are like.
What I'm talking is the Medieval concepts of "love until death parts the two" and the concept of specific sexual arrangements (i.e. sexual exclusivity) throughout such long-term arrangement. These were Medieval ideals and those are the ones copied by Disney.
Except that it's really a Medieval ideal as much as it is Biblical (and possibly) beyond. Sexual exclusivity in a marriage was almost entirely focused on women to ensure paternity of offspring. It wasn't really a romantic lovey-dovey concept.
And nald, you might have more people willing to listen to you if you were willing to actually admit that you may be wrong (or at least fighting out of your weight class)on this, and that other people with more experience in sexual and romantic relationships could possibly know what they're talking about.
When I talk about "Medieval ideal", I'm talking about (Indo)European ideals and concepts, which rather left out certain concepts that are abhorrent today - I.e. women being subordinates to their husbands is not that part. While I'm certain that lots of men would wish to have some concepts even today, i.e. their wives being their subordinates, I don't know any woman that would wish to ascribe to that, so I'm obviously not insinuating these concepts.
What I'm talking is the Medieval concepts of "love until death parts the two" and the concept of specific sexual arrangements (i.e. sexual exclusivity) throughout such long-term arrangement. These were Medieval ideals and those are the ones copied by Disney. Marrying for love is also a Medieval ideal, regardless of what you think. Modern ideal is equating love with lust and parting away when this "spark" gets diminished and/or when it is felt stronger towards someone else. This is also known as "free love", despite having nothing with the concept of love, this opinion became mainstream in post-ww2 America and some decades later it became a mainstream.
In my opinion, young Americans are raised and act in this latter way, yet regardless of this - most people are still expecting and desiring their long-term relationship to emulate the outcome described in what I address as "Medieval" on numerous occasions in here. These concepts don't stem from new era at all and simply don't fit in the way "modern" people are raised and conditioned to behave.
I am also familiar with numerous historical customs, their origins and meanings, but I don't want to hijack the topic with explaining them in detail. I didn't "learn" about these customs through popular science, especially not through mass media.
Words have meaning....you can't do assign your own theories behind everything and then use a word with a known meaning to stand for something else. You also don't get to make up your own history to fit your theory.
I have seen at least 30 posts on this topics which are directed at my persona. This topic isn't about me, I thought this was something that is clear from a get-go.
The main topic is about married people knowing of sexual history of their spouses. Side-topics and discussions related to this question's fundamentals are also discussed - i.e. do they care about the sexual history, as well as what other people think and reason (incuding unmarried couplese and singles, widowed and divorcees), whether it matters to them and why.
This topic is most surely about you....because no one else thinks like this.
Has your spouse ever told you how many people they slept with before getting married?
Do you want to know or is the number such that you don't your spouse to know.
If they confronted you about it, would you tell the truth or is a white lie acceptable if the truth won't do anyone any good?
Before getting married....or at the current moment?
Don't kid yourselves....
Married people's numbers don't matter-
99% of the married people I know......
Are sleazier than the single people I know....
Cheating is second nature to them.
Before getting married....or at the current moment?
Don't kid yourselves....
Married people's numbers don't matter-
99% of the married people I know......
Are sleazier than the single people I know....
Cheating is second nature to them.
99% of the married people you know cheat? Hummm...if that is true....which I doubt....maybe that is more a function of who you choose to associate with.....and not indicative of marriages overall.
Might we revisit the actual topic instead of indulging those who have managed to hijack this thread and make it about themselves?
Quote:
Originally Posted by lenniel
Has your spouse ever told you how many people they slept with before getting married?
Do you want to know or is the number such that you don't your spouse to know.
If they confronted you about it, would you tell the truth or is a white lie acceptable if the truth won't do anyone any good?
So I take it this question is for people who are or have been married, not people who have never even had sex or a real adult relationship.
I knew my ex-hub's. He knew mine was more than his, because his number was so low (and I had 7 years on him). He was a little bit self-conscious about it, but it made no difference to either of us in getting married and it had no bearing on our decision to split up. (Our divorce was mostly about him flipping the script on having kids. Everything else could, and most likely would, have sorted itself out, but when one person wants kids and the other doesn't, there is no point in continuing, so we parted on friendly terms.)
Most people mature out of worrying about "numbers," but the bottom line is that when you love someone enough to want to commit your life to that person, the number of previous sexual partners becomes such a non-issue as to be silly in the face of all the other things that are truly important: Shared goals and values, mutual respect, the ability to accept the other person in spite of their flaws and accept the other person's love in spite of your own, the ability to forgive, the willingness to communicate and work through issues, and the understanding that life can and will throw you both curveballs that are nothing at all like the fairy tales you concocted in your youth, before you knew what it was truly like to love another, heart, mind, and body.
I never felt the need to know the exact count of the men any woman I 've been with.
I don't really see what purpose it will serve.....
I was never into counting for myself, why would I count hers????
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
