ALL RIGHT, I am warning you. Some of you super-conservatives might want to sit down before you read this. Premarital sex is good. Politicians, conservative advocates and even past columns on this page have condemned sex outside the bonds of marriage. This viewpoint is unfair and has a negative effect on society's view of sexuality.
Premarital sex is not mandatory to human existence, nor should everyone go out and sleep with random people. Clearly, having sex is a personal decision and some may not want to do so before putting rings on their fingers. But those who advocate virginity until marriage should not make the blanket assumption that pre-marital sex is always bad.
Putting aside religious issues, a more contemporary, secular argument against premarital sex is that intercourse is a mostly, if not completely, emotional experience. Thus, the argument dictates that sex only should be performed in the bonds of marriage. This argument lets the possible mental aftermath of sex completely overshadow the bodily pleasure.
|
We cannot ignore that sexual intercourse is, in fact, an act of pleasure. True, the biological purpose of copulating is reproductive, but let's not deny the fact that all humans still have hormones. The existence of a woman's clitoris is no more necessary for her to become pregnant than her elbow is. Thinking about sex as a purely emotional process ignores facts about biological drives. Married or unmarried, adult or adolescent, people have sexual desires. Like hunger or thirst, for many people, their sexual needs must be satisfied.
Many also ignore the possibility that women and men who fornicate aren't insecure, but self-confident enough to assert themselves as sexual beings. These arguments also fail to consider that maybe they aren't lonely, just horny. Open sexuality is a display both of self-esteem and of self-awareness.
Admittedly, most people cannot isolate sex as a completely physical act. But nothing is. There can be as many emotional effects from divulging a secret to a significant other as there are from sleeping with them. For many, the results of sex are positive and the physical pleasure is worth the mental detriment.
Some of the emotional repercussions of premarital sex exist only because people say they should exist. A significant root of these feelings of attachment and guilt is the negative stigma that society has attached to premarital sex. With conservatives preaching that premarital sex is somehow wrong or bad and contributes to our moral decline, many cannot help but feel blameworthy or immoral. This guilt is unwarranted and instilling it is mean.
Society consistently has emphasized to women that they need to postpone sex. Sexuality and sentiment are not mutually exclusive. Sexual expression is a privilege granted to men and not women. One of the most important innovations of the 20th century has been effective birth control. Formerly, women were biologically limited from pursuing sexual satisfaction. Now that they can enjoy themselves without a high risk of physical consequences, societal penalties stand as a blockade. Conservative perspectives have created horrible defamations for females like "slut" and "whore." Sexual expression, however, should be an equal opportunity enterprise - not ethically reserved for males.
The question lingers where promoters of abstinence would draw the line on premarital physical contact. Fornication may be out of the question, but many would disagree on whether we should put oral sex, manual stimulation and even kissing on the blacklist. There are similar "emotional repercussions" for engaging in any type of physical activity with another human being. Perhaps oral sex is even more problematic in that it is illegal in many states, including Virginia. There is no reason why intercourse, in particular, should be deemed wrong.
Complete and utter "free love" is not necessary or ideal. There are many illegitimate reasons for having sex, including as a substitute for love, as an effort to try and please your partner and the age-old, "because everyone else is doing it." Even consensual sexual intercourse does not always occur in positive situations. But lack of a wedding ring should not prevent a committed couple from consummating their relationship, if they both want it. Circumstances prevent people from having significant others at all times, but sexual desire is less flexible. If you are safe and smart about your decision, then go for it.
(Kimberly Liu's column appears Fridays in The Cavalier Daily. She can be reached at kliu@cavalierdaily.com.)
Read More
BURSTEIN: Federal workforce cuts target Virginia — and Youngkin’s response falls short
By Carly Burstein | 3 days agoForcing employees to choose between uprooting their families or losing their livelihoods is not just callous — it is economically reckless.
HUYNH: Virginia’s proposed ‘whippets’ law is laughable
By Viet Huynh | 4 days agoAs people continue to be harmed by nitrous oxide abuse, Virginians will see this new law as the ineffective, ultimately harmful policy that it is.
EDITORIAL: We can demand more of our university presidents
By Editorial Board | 5 days agoWe hope for greater transparency because for the principles of solidarity in this statement to be enacted and effective, stakeholders must be treated as partners in resistance.
