because I am a busy person and I'd like to have the last word on the subject being the resident sexpert, re: http://www.flashflashrevolution.com/...ad.php?t=91943 posted a couple weeks ago.
That was a stupid thread, but I feel compelled to reply since so many people had different definitions of what virginity is. I hope that the thread was closed due to being in Critical Thinking improperly, and not entirely closed to the subject. I'd say "If I'm out of line, oh well, close this thread" except that sounds bossy and I am not a moderator so I will just say sorry in advance.
Just about every person who posted in that thread had a different opinion of what it means to be a "virgin". And that is probably how it should be. The best definition of a virgin that I've ever heard or come up with: a person who considers themselves a virgin. It means that virginity is not dependent upon intercourse, or finding a magical "line" that you must cross and suddenly you are not a virgin. The traditional definition of "virgin" (lack of penetration of a vagina by a penis) is extremely troublesome, and is simply too rigid and wrong for a few reasons:
1) doesn't account for homosexuality. It's not prudent to define sexually active lesbians who have never had heterosexual intercourse as "virgins"
2) It can be helpful for many women who have been raped to consider themselves to be virgins. They didn't participate in a sexual act. Why should their status change because someone was violent toward them?
3) If you try to extend the definition to things like oral sex, petting, touching... the boundaries become very fuzzy.
The only way to eliminate fuzzy boundaries is to recursively define "a virgin" as one who considers themselves a virgin based on all the definitions that they find relevant. Anything else is simply inflexible, difficult to define, rude, or insensitive. Of course, this brings in the problem of "What is a virgin in the first place?" or "What would cause someone to consider themselves to be a virgin?" That is a little deeper and is probably good fodder for a Critical Thinking thread if anyone cares about the subject. (And if you do, please PM me and tell me about the thread, since I'd love to read it and possibly comment.)
Well, that's sex ed for today. Any questions?
That was a stupid thread, but I feel compelled to reply since so many people had different definitions of what virginity is. I hope that the thread was closed due to being in Critical Thinking improperly, and not entirely closed to the subject. I'd say "If I'm out of line, oh well, close this thread" except that sounds bossy and I am not a moderator so I will just say sorry in advance.
Just about every person who posted in that thread had a different opinion of what it means to be a "virgin". And that is probably how it should be. The best definition of a virgin that I've ever heard or come up with: a person who considers themselves a virgin. It means that virginity is not dependent upon intercourse, or finding a magical "line" that you must cross and suddenly you are not a virgin. The traditional definition of "virgin" (lack of penetration of a vagina by a penis) is extremely troublesome, and is simply too rigid and wrong for a few reasons:
1) doesn't account for homosexuality. It's not prudent to define sexually active lesbians who have never had heterosexual intercourse as "virgins"
2) It can be helpful for many women who have been raped to consider themselves to be virgins. They didn't participate in a sexual act. Why should their status change because someone was violent toward them?
3) If you try to extend the definition to things like oral sex, petting, touching... the boundaries become very fuzzy.
The only way to eliminate fuzzy boundaries is to recursively define "a virgin" as one who considers themselves a virgin based on all the definitions that they find relevant. Anything else is simply inflexible, difficult to define, rude, or insensitive. Of course, this brings in the problem of "What is a virgin in the first place?" or "What would cause someone to consider themselves to be a virgin?" That is a little deeper and is probably good fodder for a Critical Thinking thread if anyone cares about the subject. (And if you do, please PM me and tell me about the thread, since I'd love to read it and possibly comment.)
Well, that's sex ed for today. Any questions?





Comment