Boyfriend - no sex before marriage

Lollipops23

I think tbh that his beliefs are quite unconventional in this day and age for a young people so he really should have had the cop on to tell her as soon as they got together. 3 months in is a bit too long, makes it look like he was leading her on.

prinz

Lollipops23 wrote: »

3 months in is a bit too long, makes it look like he was leading her on.

If so, what do the last 15 months of her staying with him in the knowledge that he didnt want sex before marriage look like?

philologos

Lollipops23 wrote: »

I think tbh that his beliefs are quite unconventional in this day and age for a young people so he really should have had the cop on to tell her as soon as they got together. 3 months in is a bit too long, makes it look like he was leading her on.

It really doesn't matter what you think about his beliefs or anyone elses. I find "this day and age" to be a terrible justification. One that seems to make the opposing view look like it originated in the Stone Age, when in reality there is nothing progressive about looser relationships at all.

He has every right to have whatever convictions he wants irrespective of how "unconventional" you or others may think they are. I don't think he's to blame at all.

I just hope that he can keep going in the face of pressure.

Dublin_Gunner

Jakkass wrote: »

It really doesn't matter what you think about his beliefs or anyone elses. I find "this day and age" to be a terrible justification. One that seems to make the opposing view look like it originated in the Stone Age, when in reality there is nothing progressive about loose relationships at all.

He has every right to have whatever convictions he wants irrespective of how "unconventional" you or others may think they are. I don't think he's to blame at all.

I just hope that he can keep going in the face of pressure.

In fairness, its a religious belief, and archaic at that. However, I do agree that he's entitled to them, and fair enough. But the OP shouldn't have to have them forced down her throat either, which is why most here are suggesting that they're not right for each other.

Those taking the side of the OP's OH seem to think everyone here is attacking their beliefs, when they're not. But merely stating that those beliefs dont correspond to the majority of modern society's, and that the OP should really move on.

Most people who replied here merely have a more modern, liberal view on the whole situation. We've been oppressed for long enough as a society to deserve not to be shackled by our partners.

People should be with people with whom they share the same values, connectivity, lifestyle (sort of), and be sexualy and morally compatible.

This is most certainly not the case for the OP (the last 2 points anyway) and therefore, for her own, and her OH's future, they should probably call it a day.

However, I do agree that the OP is partly to blame - as she's let this go on for FAR too long before deciding to do something about it. I guess she was hoping he'd change, but has now become fed up of waiting.

Lollipops23

prinz wrote: »

If so, what do the last 15 months of her staying with him in the knowledge that he didnt want sex before marriage look like?

it looks like her doing her very best to adjust to his beliefs because she was in too deep when he got around to telling her.

prinz

prinz wrote: »

If so, what do the last 15 months of her staying with him in the knowledge that he didnt want sex before marriage look like?

It looks like he was successful in his deliberate manipulation of her, which he admitted to, that he wouldn't tell her until she'd fallen for him and was therefore less likely to leave.

philologos

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

In fairness, its a religious belief, and archaic at that. However, I do agree that he's entitled to them, and fair enough. But the OP shouldn't have to have them forced down her throat either, which is why most here are suggesting that they're not right for each other.

What are you talking about? Christianity is a part of the modern world, it should be accepted that you are going to meet people who actually want to live by the tenets that were passed down to us from the Prophets, Christ and the Apostles. It's hardly archaic if it is a part of life, and if it is a reality for a lot of people in Ireland and abroad? I find it humourous that people can tell other people what parts of other peoples lives are "archaic". The OP isn't having them shoved down her throat, she has the discretion to leave him. Her boyfriend is perfectly in the right to hold whatever beliefs we want, we live in a country where freedom of conscience is enshrined in our constitution.

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

Those taking the side of the OP's OH seem to think everyone here is attacking their beliefs, when they're not. But merely stating that those beliefs dont correspond to the majority of modern society's, and that the OP should really move on.

Theres a difference between saying that someones beliefs are not in correspondence to the majority sheep-like norm, than saying that they are archaic. I personally don't think the OP's boyfriend should care what the majority think. That only holds down your own potential, and it insists to get anywhere you have to be just like everyone else. I'm a strong believer in individualism, and I think the OP should let her boyfriend be who he is, instead of who he isn't.

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

Most people who replied here merely have a more modern, liberal view on the whole situation. We've been oppressed for long enough as a society to deserve not to be shackled by our partners.

Yes, because conservatives like myself are archaic even though we live in the modern world just like you do?

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

People should be with people with whom they share the same values, connectivity, lifestyle (sort of), and be sexualy and morally compatible.

I agree, in most cases. However, relationships can work when people have differences.

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

This is most certainly not the case for the OP (the last 2 points anyway) and therefore, for her own, and her OH's future, they should probably call it a day.

I wouldn't be so quick to insist it ending. People can act like adults and discuss it instead of insisting that there are only two options.

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

However, I do agree that the OP is partly to blame - as she's let this go on for FAR too long before deciding to do something about it. I guess she was hoping he'd change, but has now become fed up of waiting.

I don't think either are to blame. They both have the right to believe whatever they wish.

prinz

Lollipops23 wrote: »

it looks like her doing her very best to adjust to his beliefs because she was in too deep when he got around to telling her.

bluewolf wrote: »

It looks like he was successful in his deliberate manipulation of her, which he admitted to, that he wouldn't tell her until she'd fallen for him and was therefore less likely to leave.

No, it was her turn to lead him on ( for much longer a time period btw ) in the hope that as the OP put it herself he would "cop on", that's why she stayed, not because he manipulated her into it.

prinz

prinz wrote: »

No, it was her turn to lead him on ( for much longer a time period btw ) in the hope that as the OP put it herself he would "cop on", that's why she stayed, not because he manipulated her into it.

And if she'd run off, you'd be insulting her for "only" wanting sex from a relationship, I don't doubt.
She stayed because she had fallen for him and wanted to give it a chance. And had been manipulated.

SarahSassy

She did say she loves him and is on here asking for advice on how to manage to what to do...

Seems she thought she could cope with the celibacy issue but now realises she cant and is somewhat 'trapped' cos she is in love.

Dublin_Gunner

Jakkass - I believe your reply has done nothing more than to compound the points I raised in my post, for that, I thank you.

prinz

bluewolf wrote: »

And if she'd run off, you'd be insulting her for "only" wanting sex from a relationship, I don't doubt.
She stayed because she had fallen for him and wanted to give it a chance. And had been manipulated.

No actually I would not. If you had read my posts I said she should have broken up with him then.Two different people, two seperate beliefs of how it should work. At that stage they were both fully aware of the situation, they should have gone their own way.


She was aware of his beliefs. It was not fair of her to keep going at that stage hoping he'd sleep with her.

philologos

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

Jakkass - I believe your reply has done nothing more than to compound the points I raised in my post, for that, I thank you.

How? Modern society isn't one and the same with liberalism. There are many influences in our modern world and whether people like it or not Christianity is one of those influences. I don't see why on earth the OP's boyfriend should have to choose between his girlfriend or his religion. It's a horrible thing to do to anyone.

prinz

SarahSassy wrote: »

She did say she loves him and is on here asking for advice on how to manage to what to do...

Seems she thought she could cope with the celibacy issue but now realises she cant and is somewhat 'trapped' cos she is in love.

Trapped is not the right word but the sentiment is right. She continued on in the hope that he'd 'cop on' and change his views. He didn't. Now she can decide what she wants.

OP lay it out for him exactly how you feel. Then its over to him.

However expecting that he is somehow obliged to have sex with you is wrong, or that he needs to alter or go against his convictions.So be prepared for the fact that he may choose his beliefs over you.

JC 2K3

Jakkass wrote: »

I don't see why on earth the OP's boyfriend should have to choose between his girlfriend or his religion. It's a horrible thing to do to anyone.

Welcome to the world of relationships. One person wants something, the other person wants something else, and it fails as a result.

Why tangential moral issues are being discussed here I don't know...

philologos

JC 2K3 wrote: »

Welcome to the world of relationships. One person wants something, the other person wants something else, and it fails as a result.

Why tangential moral issues are being discussed here I don't know...

It is not as simple as that. If these people are serious about their relationship they should sit down and work it out for themselves in an accomodating and a receptive manner. Then and only then if there is no means of it going any further should it end.

prinz: I'd agree with you, carrying on a relationship in the expectation that her boyfriend would somehow drop his convictions is ridiculous.

Wibbs

JC 2K3 wrote: »

Why tangential moral issues are being discussed here I don't know...

Agreed. Right there have been enough warnings given out about getting into back and forth debate and at this point it's getting silly. The next post of that nature gets a ban. Please stick to the topic of the OP's situation. End of. Thank you

Dudess

prinz wrote: »

My point was it's disingenuous to presume that the OP will have a terrible sex life in the future with this guy. There's nothing to back that up. It could be fantastic. There's so much scaremongering going on it's laughable

No, people are saying their sex life COULD be disastrous... which it could. Or it could be brilliant, but no way of knowing...
Also, sex being better within marriage - how on earth? A couple in love is a couple in love is a couple in love, whether they're married, engaged or neither.

Jakkass wrote: »

Too serious about his convictions? Easy for someone to say who doesn't share them isn't it?

Yes, he's too serious about this - to the point where he's not going to back down. A lack of sex is making the OP unhappy, therefore she should finish with him.

I don't think that he's to blame for this at all. He's in his right to have this preference, and clearly thought that the OP didn't have any issue with it until now.

I love how the boyfriend's beliefs/preferences must be treated with hushed awe, but the OP's belief that sex is part of a loving relationship and fulfils natural needs can be dismissed...

Love > Sex life surely? Or am I just being overly naiive here. I'd hate to think that this is the common or mainstream point of view in Irish society, but it seems to be.

WTF?! I despair. Sex is a part of love. It's dismaying the people here who have the attitude that sex and love are always separate - a skewed view that's a bit frightening actually.
And is "love" before marriage different to "love" after marriage? If an unmarried couple deeply in love express this physically, is their love that bit "less" because they have now had sex and aren't married?

A chap in a similar situation to your boyfriend posted on here a while ago, and the posters essentially suggested that he should dump his girlfriend or dump his religion. It doesn't have to be that way

It really does, OP. I mean, are you even christian? I'm not talking about being baptised and going to mass/service the odd time - I'm talking actually christian, to the same extent as your boyfriend? If not, then you should definitely finish with him. Christians should only be with christians - a christian group would surely discourage its members from being in relationships with non christians... unless it was with the aim of converting them.

Never mind the lack of sex OP, I think we've moved on from that. The religion aspect is huge - it's a lifestyle. Don't enter it unless it's something that you also embrace, which you don't seem to.

And Jakkass, people are being objective - they're looking at both members of this relationship and concluding that the man should only be with someone who shares his beliefs and the woman should only be with someone who shares hers. Obviously when you say there's no "objective response" here, you mean "response that's sympathetic to the boyfriend".

philologos

Dudess wrote: »

Yes, he's too serious about this - to the point where he's not going to back down. A lack of sex is making the OP unhappy, therefore she should finish with him.

He's not really too serious about it at all. Christianity defines people for who they are, if the OP doesn't like her boyfriend for who he is, I despair in seeing the reason why they are still together. If she truly loves him, going without sex until marriage should be more of a non-issue. It's funny how it is the one who stands up for his convictions or his faith in God who is seen as the one who is being too serious.

Dudess wrote: »

I love how the boyfriend's beliefs/preferences must be treated with hushed awe, but the OP's belief that sex is part of a loving relationship and fulfils natural needs can be dismissed...

Not really hushed awe. However, he as a citizen of this country deserves the right to freedom of conscience just like anyone else. The OP is entittled to her belief too, but her boyfriend isn't obliged to compromise his religion for her relationship. Neither are actually obliged. I respect the OP's boyfriend for being strong in his conviction and in his faith, and I have no doubt that God will reward him for his endurance despite the pressures.

Dudess wrote: »

WTF?! I despair. Sex is a part of love. It's dismaying the people here who have the attitude that sex and love are always separate - a skewed view that's a bit frightening actually.
And is "love" before marriage different to "love" after marriage? If an unmarried couple deeply in love express this physically, is their love that bit "less" because they have now had sex and aren't married?

Often they are separate. I think that love can exist without sex, and sex can exist without love. I think there is a time and a place for sex, and sex before marriage is a dangerous road to go down when people value sex differently. One can think that they have carried out an act which is special, and one can think that it is just a normal thing that people do. People don't seem to realise the pain and the hurt that this can cause people. I think it's best to be cautious and promote a mutual respect for sex within marriage. I admire the OP's boyfriend for trying to do this, and I'd like to think that I would have the courage to stand up and not succumb to secular pressures.

Dudess wrote: »

It really does, OP. I mean, are you even christian? I'm not talking about being baptised and going to mass/service the odd time - I'm talking actually christian, to the same extent as your boyfriend? If not, then you should definitely finish with him. Christians should only be with christians - a christian group would surely discourage its members from being in relationships with non christians... unless it was with the aim of converting them.

If they have a good relationship apart from this single issue, I think the OP should strive to keep it together. That's what I think is at least somewhat praiseworthy of her post here, she is trying to keep her relationship together. People of different religions can and do marry with eachother, even if it is forbidden, not kosher, or haram in some communities.

As for "Christians only being with Christians". We have our own standard for how to deal with this issue it's in the Biblical text. Christians are permitted to marry non-believers if they have the intention of bringing them and their children to Christ. I personally would like to find someone with the same beliefs as I did, but it is by no means a restriction. The OP needs to decide if she likes her boyfriend for who he is as a Christian or not.

Dudess wrote: »

Never mind the lack of sex OP, I think we've moved on from that. The religion aspect is huge - it's a lifestyle. Don't enter it unless it's something that you also embrace, which you don't seem to.

You can like someone for who they are without adopting their particular beliefs.

Dudess wrote: »

And Jakkass, people are being objective - they're looking at both members of this relationship and concluding that the man should only be with someone who shares his beliefs and the woman should only be with someone who shares hers. Obviously when you say there's no "objective response" here, you mean "response that's sympathetic to the boyfriend".

It's a one sided slide. Ditch the religion or ditch your girlfriend. I can't help but be sickened by that.

Silverfish

Jakkass and Dudess, 3 day ban.

Oh The Humanity

You see this is the thing, we completely click in terms of attraction and personality, he's a really cool guy.

Hmm, but OP how do you know you click in terms of attraction. Its possible to kiss and cuddle someone and feel its all good. But that doesn't mean sleeping together will click, you dont know until ye do. I mean it sounds hopeful alright but.....have you any clues to his physical style?

I dont think he sounds like a cool guy though from the little you've told us here. He sounds a little bit 'my way or the highway'
Also, his attitudes that he has got from his family, are these really his own beliefs, is he able to illustrate his beliefs and points convincingly or is he just parrotting what the family says?

All my friends think he's really sound too.

What are your friends like? Are they young...what ages? Are they impressionable? Is he very goodlooking? Again paint more of a picture for us...Do they have sex with their BF's/GF's....
Also, if they didnt like him, would they tell you the truth....and do they know about his beliefs...?

I don't have low self esteem in terms of relationships at all - I'm actually hyper aware of fairness and equality in relationships. Thats why I have gone along with what he wants in relation to sex.

Hmm, I think by the sounds of it you are SO hyper aware of 'fairness' that you have sold yourself down the river a little bit. You fear he doesn't understand/value your sacrifice......I agree with you on that one.....Its all very well for him, everything is suiting him at the moment. If you were to become converted to extreme veganism in the morning say and you requested him not to eat meat/wear leather etc in your presence, would he honour your beliefs?
In other words does it cut both ways?

The moving bit, well in terms of location in order for us to have any real long term plans one of us has to move so I understand that.

Fair enough.

and I am no pushover in terms of how many children I will/wont have, he knows this and has to accept it.

....has to accept it.......so has it been a struggle to get him to accept this?

I know I am young but I am quite definite as to the type of man i am attracted to, and what I will tolerate in relationships and what I wont. I understand his motivations for abstaining from sex, but it doesnt mean I am happy about the situation at all.

Grand !

What I really think is that he has a complete lack of understanding as to the sacrifice I am making for him.

I wholeheartedly agree. This worries me....Why has a healthy, young, hetrosexual man taken this stance? Is it really religion?

If he says so take notice does he go to church? does he pray....does it ring true? There could be something more than meets the eye here. When you are being asked to make a huge personal sacrifice like this...make sure you are informed by something more than just the word of the person asking it of you. See that you are satisfied with his explanation, I personally smell a rat here, but then again I dont know ye.....

Appreciate all the comments by the way And I suppose in the interest of fairness I am seeking advice as to whether I might be quite selfish in my own views.

You are not being at all selfish, you are being asked to comply with a way of life that is .....unusual....you have the right to know why, the right to be totally satisfied with the answers. The right to ask him to make a similar sacrifice for you to redress the balance if you feel the need.

I personally just could not accept this situation. I think its very worrying in the year 2009 that a young girl is being put in this position...supposedly because of religion. I want you to ensure you are not being manipulated here.

You mentioned his whole family are religious, if you do marry him, you would be married into this lot. He might see his mother as the controller of himself and then by proxy you. Im assuming of course she is still around...?

Look, just be very careful, find out exactly what you are thinking of signing up for here. Remember a lot of evil has been perpetrated down the years in the name of religion. Its up to you to ask questions and find out what is going on.

Woger

Where does no sex before marriage as a religous rule come from? If it's a catholic thing it's pretty ridiculous as celibate men are in no position to lecture people on sex.

Jakkass

Jakkass wrote: »

He's in his right to have this preference, and clearly thought that the OP didn't have any issue with it until now.

Did you miss the part where he deliberately did not tell her his views on this until he knew she'd fallen for him because he knew she'd leave before that?

Wibbs

This is going in circles and hardly helping the OP. Closed. If the OP wants to start a new thread please do, though that new thread will be heavily moderated so this isn't repeated.

PS Woger also take a 3 day break as there have been enough mod warnings on this thread.