Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below 
Lift Chief
New member
curling said:
There are actually some interesting points here once you gloss over the bullshit.
I'm shocked.
sex after marriage
- Thread starter dusty2
- Start date
There are actually some interesting points here once you gloss over the bullshit.
I'm shocked.
Lift Chief
New member
curling said:
The only problem is that in contemporary society everyone talks about sex. So even if you're married to the only person you've ever had sex with and you think it's pretty good... all your friends talk about what their respective mate does to them/how good they are- whatever. Also, society is so replete with sexual messages that you're going to have an idea of what good sex should be like... so even if you haven't actually had that good sex you'll have a mark to compare it to.
It could have worked before the sexual revolution maybe... probably wouldn't work now though.
I was out all day so I'm sorry I'm late with my asnwer. here it is.
I cut back your quote to save some bandwith.
The bottom line is::: an Orgasm is an Orgasm is an Orgasm, if you as a man waited until your mid 20's to have sex chances are you'll climax to the draft of an open window.
A woman on the other hand may take months even years to find out what makes her Orgasm, and this still does not rule out the "china chocha/ Congo coochie" theory that I explained on my earlyer post, cause if you are a "pencil dick" like you said, you are never going to do it for her, no matter how naive and inexperienced she is.
if she is so "blissfully ignorant " as you stated, after sex she is just going to sit there and think "Um..... that was it?" she is going to wonder why the women in all the movies ( R rated movies not just porn) look like they are having such a good time while she just felt like you had sex "on her" not "with her" cause while you where enjoying the friction on your little sized little use penis she felt nothing. Beilive me she'll start to wonder one day.
By the way I'm in no way saying you have a small member, I just use the "you" to make a point.
curling said:
I cut back your quote to save some bandwith.
The bottom line is::: an Orgasm is an Orgasm is an Orgasm, if you as a man waited until your mid 20's to have sex chances are you'll climax to the draft of an open window.
A woman on the other hand may take months even years to find out what makes her Orgasm, and this still does not rule out the "china chocha/ Congo coochie" theory that I explained on my earlyer post, cause if you are a "pencil dick" like you said, you are never going to do it for her, no matter how naive and inexperienced she is.
if she is so "blissfully ignorant " as you stated, after sex she is just going to sit there and think "Um..... that was it?" she is going to wonder why the women in all the movies ( R rated movies not just porn) look like they are having such a good time while she just felt like you had sex "on her" not "with her" cause while you where enjoying the friction on your little sized little use penis she felt nothing. Beilive me she'll start to wonder one day.
By the way I'm in no way saying you have a small member, I just use the "you" to make a point.
flexygrl
New member
LOL!!
My thought is that sex is an essential ingredient to a good relationship. Although if your religious beliefs prevent it, you are not doomed. Good sex is all about communication. It's about learning how to please the other person. As long as you have good communication skills, you can get through anything! IMO!
D
Deleted member 33117
Guest
dusty, also bear in mind that no one is perfect and we all sin. The Bible also says not to touch the carcass of a dead pig, yet how often have you touched a dead pig without thinking about it. How often have you told a lie, a hundreds, thousands of times, perhaps more? The point is not to dwell upon how much we sin, but rather are we forgiven for our sins. Since we have all sinned, and will all sin again, regardless of how good we try to be. Christ sacrificed himself so that we would not be punished for this.
Generic MALE
New member
Apart from any statements based on faith, numerous studies show that couples that live together before getting married are more likely to get divorced than those that do not (a cut and paste is inculded below of a recent CDC study). Other studies show that the children of people who live together before marraige do more poorly in school and domestic violence is higher among couples who live together before marraige.
==============================================
Study Reveals that Living Together Before Marriage May Lead to More Divorce
According to a new study from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), couples who cohabitate before marriage may be more likely to divorce than those who do not live together before marriage. In the study of 11,000 women, the researchers discovered that couples who did not cohabitate before
marriage had a 31% chance of divorcing after 10 years, and those who did live together had a 40% chance of divorce.
The researchers speculate that couples who live together before marriage may have different values than those who do not cohabitate.
==============================================
Study Reveals that Living Together Before Marriage May Lead to More Divorce
According to a new study from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), couples who cohabitate before marriage may be more likely to divorce than those who do not live together before marriage. In the study of 11,000 women, the researchers discovered that couples who did not cohabitate before
marriage had a 31% chance of divorcing after 10 years, and those who did live together had a 40% chance of divorce.
The researchers speculate that couples who live together before marriage may have different values than those who do not cohabitate.
Generic MALE
New member
Friday, July 21, 2000 Arizona Republic article by Mike McCloy:
“Maricopa County officials may soon confront an issue that is fiscally minor but politically dynamite: extending employee benefits to unmarried partners of county workers.
“The county’s Human Resources Department is drafting a proposal for providing health-care and other coverage to [cohabiting] employees’ heterosexual and homosexual companions…”
PROVIDING UNMARRIED PARTNER BENEFITS
TO COHABITING COUPLES IS BAD PUBLIC POLICY BECAUSE OF:
*INCREASED RATE OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE*
*INCREASED RATE OF DIVORCE IN SUBSEQUENT MARRIAGE*
*POORER PSYCHOLOGICAL HEALTH*
*ADVERSE CONSEQUENCES TO CHILDREN*
*INCREASED ALCHOHOL PROBLEMS*
Increased Rate of Domestic Violence
A study using a nationally representative sample of 6,000 households found that cohabiting couples were 180% more likely to engage in physical aggression toward each other compared to married couples.
A study using a nationally representative sample of more than 2000 19 to 49-year-old adults found that partners in cohabiting unions have more disagreements, fight more often and report lower levels of happiness than their married counterparts.
Cohabiting couples are 180% more likely than married couples to report episodes of hitting, shoving and throwing things, even after controlling for income, race, education and age.
Increased Rate of Divorce in Subsequent Marriage
In a study of 3,300 cases, cohabiting couples who subsequently married had a 46% higher divorce rate when compared to couples who did not cohabitate prior to marriage.
In a longitudinal study of cohabiting couples, it was found that [1] cohabitation increased acceptance of divorce and [2] the longer the existence of the cohabiting relationship, the less enthusiastic the couple was toward marriage and childbearing.
Couples who cohabit before marriage are 90% more likely to divorce within ten years than couples who did not cohabit.
In a study of the experience of cohabitation with 18 to 23-year-old adults, it was found that cohabitation changes young adult attitudes toward marriage and divorce in ways that make them more prone to divorce.
Poorer Psychological Health
Cohabiting couples report lower levels of happiness and sexual satisfaction as well as poorer relationships withtheir parents.
Cohabiting couples are 300% more likely to suffer from depression than married couples.
Adverse Consequences
Children born to cohabiting parents are 125% more likely to see their parents breakup before they reach age 16 when compared to children born to married parents.
Children living with a mother and a cohabiting partner have significantly more behavior problems and lower academic performance than children living in intact families do.
A study in Great Britain found that rates of child abuse for children living with married biological parents were phenomenally lower when compared to other child household living arrangements.
Increased Alcohol Problems
In seven-year study involving 1200 unmarried adults aged 18 to 24 years, researchers found that participants who chose to cohabitate during the seven-year study had significantly more alcohol problems than participants who chose to marry. Neither premarital levels of alcohol problems among cohabitors nor other demographic characteristics could explain the greater number of alcohol Problems (cont.) problems among cohabitors. The researchers concluded that there is something peculiar about the status of cohabitation, rather than the characteristics of cohabitors, that causes a significantly higher rate of alcohol problems.
ENDNOTES
Stets, “Cohabiting and Marital Aggression: The Role of Social Isolation”, Journal of Marriage and the Family, volume 53, August 1991, pages 669-680.
Brown and Booth, “Cohabitation Versus Marriage: A Comparison of Relationship Quality”, Journal of Marriage and Family, volume 58, August 1996, pages 668-678.
Whitehead, quoting sociologist Linda Waite, “How We Mate”, City Journal, Summer 1999, pages 38-49.
DeMaris, Alfred and Rao, “Premarital Cohabitation and Subsequent Marital Stability in the United States: A Reassessment”, Journal of Marriage and the Family, volume 54, 1992, pages 178-190.
Axinn and Barber, “Living Arrangements and family Formation Attitudes in Early Adulthood”, Journal of Marriage and the Family, volume 59, 1997, pages 595-611.
Bumpass and Sweet, “ National Estimates of Cohabitation: Cohort levels and Union Stability”, Demography, 26, 1989, page 621. See also Balakrishnan, Rao, Lapierre-Adamcyk and Krotki, “A Hazard Model Analysis of the Covariates of Marriage Dissolution in Canada, Demography, volume 24, 1987, pages 395-406.
Waite and Joyner, “Men’s and Women’s General Happiness and sexual Satisfaction in Marriage, Cohabitation and Single Living”, unpublished manuscript – Population Research Venter, University of Chicago, 1996. See also Amato and Booth, “A Generation at Risk”, Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press, Press 1997, Table 4-2, pages 258.
Robins, Lee and Reiger, “Psychiatric Disorders in America”, New York Free Press, 1990, page 72.
Whitehead, “How We Mate”, City Journal, 1999, pages 38-49.
Thompson, Hanson, McLanahan, “Family Structure and Child Well-Being: Economic Resources versus Parental Behavior”, Social Forces, volume 73, 1994, pages 221-242.
Whelan, “Broken Homes and Battered Children: A study of the Relationship Between Child Abuse and Family Type”, London, England, Family Education Trust, 1993, Table 12, pages 29.
Horwits and White, “The Relationship of Cohabitation and Mental Health: A Study of a Young Adult Cohort”, Journal of Marriage and the Family, volume 60, 1998, pages 505-514
“Maricopa County officials may soon confront an issue that is fiscally minor but politically dynamite: extending employee benefits to unmarried partners of county workers.
“The county’s Human Resources Department is drafting a proposal for providing health-care and other coverage to [cohabiting] employees’ heterosexual and homosexual companions…”
PROVIDING UNMARRIED PARTNER BENEFITS
TO COHABITING COUPLES IS BAD PUBLIC POLICY BECAUSE OF:
*INCREASED RATE OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE*
*INCREASED RATE OF DIVORCE IN SUBSEQUENT MARRIAGE*
*POORER PSYCHOLOGICAL HEALTH*
*ADVERSE CONSEQUENCES TO CHILDREN*
*INCREASED ALCHOHOL PROBLEMS*
Increased Rate of Domestic Violence
A study using a nationally representative sample of 6,000 households found that cohabiting couples were 180% more likely to engage in physical aggression toward each other compared to married couples.
A study using a nationally representative sample of more than 2000 19 to 49-year-old adults found that partners in cohabiting unions have more disagreements, fight more often and report lower levels of happiness than their married counterparts.
Cohabiting couples are 180% more likely than married couples to report episodes of hitting, shoving and throwing things, even after controlling for income, race, education and age.
Increased Rate of Divorce in Subsequent Marriage
In a study of 3,300 cases, cohabiting couples who subsequently married had a 46% higher divorce rate when compared to couples who did not cohabitate prior to marriage.
In a longitudinal study of cohabiting couples, it was found that [1] cohabitation increased acceptance of divorce and [2] the longer the existence of the cohabiting relationship, the less enthusiastic the couple was toward marriage and childbearing.
Couples who cohabit before marriage are 90% more likely to divorce within ten years than couples who did not cohabit.
In a study of the experience of cohabitation with 18 to 23-year-old adults, it was found that cohabitation changes young adult attitudes toward marriage and divorce in ways that make them more prone to divorce.
Poorer Psychological Health
Cohabiting couples report lower levels of happiness and sexual satisfaction as well as poorer relationships withtheir parents.
Cohabiting couples are 300% more likely to suffer from depression than married couples.
Adverse Consequences
Children born to cohabiting parents are 125% more likely to see their parents breakup before they reach age 16 when compared to children born to married parents.
Children living with a mother and a cohabiting partner have significantly more behavior problems and lower academic performance than children living in intact families do.
A study in Great Britain found that rates of child abuse for children living with married biological parents were phenomenally lower when compared to other child household living arrangements.
Increased Alcohol Problems
In seven-year study involving 1200 unmarried adults aged 18 to 24 years, researchers found that participants who chose to cohabitate during the seven-year study had significantly more alcohol problems than participants who chose to marry. Neither premarital levels of alcohol problems among cohabitors nor other demographic characteristics could explain the greater number of alcohol Problems (cont.) problems among cohabitors. The researchers concluded that there is something peculiar about the status of cohabitation, rather than the characteristics of cohabitors, that causes a significantly higher rate of alcohol problems.
ENDNOTES
Stets, “Cohabiting and Marital Aggression: The Role of Social Isolation”, Journal of Marriage and the Family, volume 53, August 1991, pages 669-680.
Brown and Booth, “Cohabitation Versus Marriage: A Comparison of Relationship Quality”, Journal of Marriage and Family, volume 58, August 1996, pages 668-678.
Whitehead, quoting sociologist Linda Waite, “How We Mate”, City Journal, Summer 1999, pages 38-49.
DeMaris, Alfred and Rao, “Premarital Cohabitation and Subsequent Marital Stability in the United States: A Reassessment”, Journal of Marriage and the Family, volume 54, 1992, pages 178-190.
Axinn and Barber, “Living Arrangements and family Formation Attitudes in Early Adulthood”, Journal of Marriage and the Family, volume 59, 1997, pages 595-611.
Bumpass and Sweet, “ National Estimates of Cohabitation: Cohort levels and Union Stability”, Demography, 26, 1989, page 621. See also Balakrishnan, Rao, Lapierre-Adamcyk and Krotki, “A Hazard Model Analysis of the Covariates of Marriage Dissolution in Canada, Demography, volume 24, 1987, pages 395-406.
Waite and Joyner, “Men’s and Women’s General Happiness and sexual Satisfaction in Marriage, Cohabitation and Single Living”, unpublished manuscript – Population Research Venter, University of Chicago, 1996. See also Amato and Booth, “A Generation at Risk”, Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press, Press 1997, Table 4-2, pages 258.
Robins, Lee and Reiger, “Psychiatric Disorders in America”, New York Free Press, 1990, page 72.
Whitehead, “How We Mate”, City Journal, 1999, pages 38-49.
Thompson, Hanson, McLanahan, “Family Structure and Child Well-Being: Economic Resources versus Parental Behavior”, Social Forces, volume 73, 1994, pages 221-242.
Whelan, “Broken Homes and Battered Children: A study of the Relationship Between Child Abuse and Family Type”, London, England, Family Education Trust, 1993, Table 12, pages 29.
Horwits and White, “The Relationship of Cohabitation and Mental Health: A Study of a Young Adult Cohort”, Journal of Marriage and the Family, volume 60, 1998, pages 505-514
