Should people who are waiting until marriage to have sex talk to their partner about sex while dating?

[SomeGUYonGAG]

I've been considering on waiting myself.

I've heard stories of people who waited until marriage to have sex and regretted it because their partner wasn't sexually compatible.

It's NEVER about their partner having a really small penis or a funny looking vagina or anything like that. It's always that she won't do this, or he won't do this position or she won't do my fetishes or he doesn't believe in oral.

I thought couple were supposed to at least talk about sex while dating if they're waiting until marriage. After a couple months of dating when the relationship is at the point where most couple are already having sex, I'd want to talk about it. I'd want us to share every detail, what positions are you interested in, what fetishes do you have and what not, we could even do it through text if we're shy about it, and if there's something that one wants to do and the other doesn't then we'd know that we may not be sexually compatible.

But why don't they do it? Or do they ant it's just a fringe minority that don't but people use those few stories as a reason not to wait.

[Obtuse]

I think talking about it would be smart. It's kind of difficult to know for sure without trying though. From my perspective, it's like trying to decide whether you two would make good dance partners with a similar rhythm, taste for music, overall mindset about dancing and music, etc, without actually dancing together. Some discussion would at least be a start though to figuring it out, and maybe you can get an idea in the way you two express affection and desire for each other outside of actual sex. I never found it so easy to tell though for sure without trying.

From my standpoint abstinence before marriage shouldn't lead to much dissatisfaction though because you two have no point of comparison. It's like you can't be so disappointed with a dish if you haven't tried others. It's only when you've tried and then try another one that you have a point of comparison.

I never found myself sexually dissatisfied with girls until my third girlfriend with whom I have this ridiculous connection and chemistry in the bedroom as though we could read each other's minds in that context, that we could do the verbal equivalent of finishing each other's sentences with our bodies. We even bumped heads trying to kiss each other at the exact same time as we were getting started, and the laughter and sweetness that followed was a most wonderful feeling. Yet I don't think I could have ever foreseen that in advance through any type of discussion. After we broke up, I also tried those discussions and didn't have that same thing, disappointingly, until I met my now-wife. But you know, I never would have missed it if I just stayed with my very first girlfriend (the relationship turning into an LDR messed that up).

[AndyOh]

I have seen waaay to many posts, mostly from women, where they waited till marriage to have sex and one of them just sucks at it, does not want to do it, is really bad at it, has no ideal how to please their partner and does not want to learn... the list goes on.

So by all means, at least talk about it; talk about your thoughts, expectations, fears, stories, whatever. But get it on the table. So you are not blindsided by your partner and whatever problems there might be looming ahead in the bed.

[AndyOh]

Thanks for the MHO. Glad we talked about this!

[sejla]

Yes there should be some talk about sex before marriage. There should be some talk before having sex with anyone. Likes, dislikes and no that is off the table always. I think there is a lot one can do without going to full intercourse to see if two people are compatible and I'm assuming during the time before marriage people are making out to use an old term. I would think that from that one could see if there is a strong attraction and how frequently one engages in the attraction. There used to be slow steps toward sex instead of going directly to it. It allowed people to see if they were compatible or not.

[btbc92]

Absolutely! That is how you determine sexual compatibility. It is a mandatory discussion! Always! Plus a lot of them already have issues, and they're already feeling themselves up with garbage from pornography and other bad influences. Sex should be discovered, it should not be tainted with fetishes and all of that filth. That's why they're so unhappy. Never do it through text. Always speak about this face to face. And never bring that crap into the bedroom. Ever. Because if you can't keep up with whatever you going to destroy American Inside Out making it a terrible sex life.

[btbc92]

It inside out

[SueShe]

There is no need to talk about something that is not relevant or important at that stage of their relationship. It may only bring hardships or a boost in libido that the one or the other may not be or want to satisfy.

I see it like if you show a toddler a lollipop but tell him/her that he/she cannot have it. It is not only rude but also downright mean.

People are most of the time compatible. As long as the one has a penis that is slightly bigger than a micropenis (2'') and the other a vaginal canal of 3'' or longer and neither one have genital malformations, there is absolutely no reason why they should not be compatible.

A 3''-5' penis will be compatible with 99% of the world's female adult population.

You are addressing issues that have strictly nothing to do with compatibility but only with likes/dislikes and the perception of what is acceptable/perverted.

[SlickDizJT]

Wow 3-5 seriously? Now I feel special

[morimeme1]

The likes/dislikes, boundries, the size of their libido, interests and such also do fall into the category of sexual compatibility cause if two partners can not fulfill their sexuality in the way they feel comfortable with then it does account to a shitty sex life leading to relationship problems.

[SueShe]

@morimeme1 And that is exactly where the problem lies. People tend to put too much emphasis on sex even thought that type of activity represents less than one single percent of the time in an adult's lifespan.

[morimeme1]

It doesn't really matter what percentage of your life you spend doing that, it is a natural need for most people and a daily occurance for those in relationships. Sexuality is a large part of our being and suppressing that because "it doesn't matter too much" leads up to even mental illnesses. It is a natural thing and since in a relationship it is important - it makes sense to talk about it too to make the most of it and not walk into marriage to find unpleasant suprises.

[SueShe]

@morimeme1 thanks for your opinion

[DizzyDesii]

You should definitely still talk about it. Just dont be surprised if it tempts you to do it sooner

[Moonchild714]

If you are alrwady long term or considering marrying each other then yes you should discuss Sexual Expectations and Desires. But jyst in the early dating phase no that makes waiting very difficult. And if you then have sex out of heat of the moment obe ir bith of you may regret it and that can ruin the relationship.

[lightbulb27]

I was checking multiple boxes on this. I think you should, but not to the point of driving you stark raving mad with blue balls. I think you have to figure out if you are compatible and you may not know that til you get there and work through stuff because closer you get the more things

[SarahsSummer]

Definitely talk to your partner. You’ll need to know if they have the same beliefs.

[coachTanthony]

-----------If you are not going to have sex until marriage then the next closest thing to making sure you are compatible is talking about it.

If they don't even want to do that then it might be some bad sex coming your way.

My opinion though is HAVE sex. Don't risk it.

[creepyperve]

I think they have an obligation to state those intentions very early on for obvious reasons

[Temprofile564]

Yea I believe waiting for marriage is good but I do believe talking about sex is important. Make sure u guys have the same sexual interest and making sure ur open to each other interest

[Pamina]

They should just have sex like grown ups.

[morimeme1]

What does that even mean?

[Pamina]

@morimeme1 That they should get rid of their indoctrination. They're grown ups, they have sexual urges and desires, they feel attracted t each other, they trust each other. Why not have sex? Because of some archaic, nonsensical indoctrination that is built on nothing but shaming people for their natural sexual urges and making them supress them. And that's fucking unhealthy for your mental health. People need a happy sex life to be happy. I hope that explanation is satisfactory.

[morimeme1]

Ok yeah that was way better than what I thought you meant but oh well, people are free to follow any religion they want and that often includes waiting until marriage which is fine as a personal choice, yet very irritating when they start trying to shame others for not going down the same path.

[Pamina]

@morimeme1 Of course they are free to and should be. I would never even want to strip them of that right. But I want people to be raised in a way that teaches them that sex is natural, beautiful, and especially healthy.

[morimeme1]

Yeah, sadly rather often they have been raised with shame regading their own sexuality and guess what - it doesn't magically go away once they are married. Which should totally be treated.

[Pamina]

@morimeme1 Exactly. And in the vast majority of cases of people choosing to wait until marriage, that is a symptom of that shaming.

[Gavyn]

Modern teachings of Christianity teach youth that sex is okay, and it’s even a great thing, but only in the confines of marriage. There’s no indoctrination or shaming, there’s just teaching what the religion teaches, without emotionally damaging the people being taught, though I will admit that that is an issue of the past.

[Pamina]

@Gavyn "and it’s even a great thing, but only in the confines of marriage." - And that's exactly the problem. Sex outside of marriage isn't any less great. "There’s no indoctrination or shaming, there’s just teaching what the religion teaches, without emotionally damaging the people being taught, though I will admit that that is an issue of the past. " - You're delusional beyond repair if you believe that. Nobody's claiming every religious person is like that, but it happens and it happens a-fucking-lot within religious communities and families.

[Gavyn]

Actually, science has shown that the more people you casually have sex with the less you’ll be able to commit later because of how abusing the hormones released during sex works. As for that, it depends on the communities. None of the ones I’ve been in during my lifetime have been like that, but I know they exist.

[Pamina]

@Gavyn "Actually, science has shown that the more people you casually have sex with the less you’ll be able to commit later because of how abusing the hormones released during sex works." - First, what does that have to do with any of what I said? Second, if you make a claim that "science" has "proven" something, then post a link to a source of that "proof". Otherwise it might as well just be you talking out of your ass. "None of the ones I’ve been in during my lifetime have been like that, but I know they exist." - And they're still rampant, especially in rural America. Also, shaming doesn't have to be a deliberate and mean spirited thing, it can also happen very subtly and unintended. I think you're not really aware of that. If you raise your kids making them believe something is bad, then they will obviously feel shame when they suddenly start having urges and want to do those "bad" things. That's exactly why it's so fucked up to teach kids this kind of nonsense.

[Gavyn]

www.thetrumpet.com/7750-the-emotional-corrosion-of-casual-sex

[Pamina]

@Gavyn Oh boy, okay. The Trumpet is a religious magazine. That's the opposite of an unbiased, scientific source. Show me an actual scientific source, then we can talk. But again - what does that claim even have anything to do with what I said?

[Gavyn]

I was getting to that. But if you refuse to look at anything biased, you’ll never look at anything. Everything in this world is biased

[Pamina]

@Gavyn So, you don't know how science works, I see. Do you know how the scientific method works? Do know how peer-review works? Do you know the principle of falsification? Apparently not. I don't care how biased they are as long as they cite an actual scientific study. But they didn't cite anything, it's just an opinion piece citing the Bible. You said "science" has "proven" - so, show me the scientifc studies then please?

[Pamina]

But okay, let's ignore for now the fact that you can't show me a scientific study that backs up your claim. Let's talk about the other part - what does it have to do with what I said anyway?

[Gavyn]

I know how that works, but that doesn’t make it less biased. And honestly, I don’t trust much science as it is, as it could theoretically be disproven tomorrow. Nothing in science is concrete. There’s no reason to base everything so heavily on it when it could be wrong.

[Pamina]

@Gavyn "I know how that works, but that doesn’t make it less biased." - That literally means you do not know how it works. Nothing is ever 100% unbiased, but the scienctific method gets very fucking close to it. That's the whole point of it. And to believe that the level of bias in science (which is very low) is comparable to the bias of a religious magazine (which is pretty much 100% bias) just shows how intellectually disingenuous you are. "And honestly, I don’t trust much science as it is, as it could theoretically be disproven tomorrow." - That's just further proof that you do not understand the first thing about how science works. Sad how they don't teach kids these things in school, apparently. Because if they did, you'd know how painfully ignorant it is what you just said. "There’s no reason to base everything so heavily on it when it could be wrong." - That doesn't even make any sense. Science is about FALSIFICATION and getting as close as possible to an accurate approximation. If you have one thing that is 99% accurate and another thing that is 0.5% accurate, then the first thing is PRACTICALLY safe to be considered accurate. That's how the world works. We fly planes and speceships because the science behind it is accurate enough without being 100%. But you're here telling me that it's a logical thing to disbelieve the 99% as much as the 0.5%. You are by definition an idiot then. You made a claim. That claim was that "science has proven" something. But now you say you don't take science seriously. So then why even make that claim? Let alone that you can't back your claim up with a scienctific source. You are intellectually disingenuous and therefore disqualified from the discussion. Get back to school, kid. And I mean a proper one, not your creationist brainwashing factory. Good luck.

[wulibuli]

How do you expect to find out the things you kike without having sex?

[slatyb]

If your goal in dating is to meet your future husband, you absolutely must talk about sex before you marry a guy. Do you imagine that sexual compatibility is magic? Maybe he's imagining sex twice a day and you are think more like once a week? Maybe he is expecting oral sex and you aren't keen, or vice versa. If you aren't going to have sex, then you have to discuss your expectations before thinking about marrying.

[arabgoddess]

It's very important that both are aware of their own sexuality, what they are seeking and what arouses them.. If none of these are met, the sex life will be miserable

[GabrielsMinds]

Don't listen to these godless savages. You should never talk about it and only do it in the dark once you're the mature age of 42. And after the act, once you've cleansed your body under a freezing waterfall, you should conduct penance in the form of mild self-mutilation—the way the lord intended.

[4mazing]

I like doing sex. I hate talking about sex.

When I was growing up, the girls from my school sang this song that went "Let's talk about sex baby..."

It was a terrible song. Sex is a terrible conversation topic.

[broken_heart_at_48]

Me and my wife had sex non-stop from day 3( she held out on me) except for 2 months before we got married I felt like we needed to make sure that there was more between us then just sex. Like everybody kept trying to convince us. It wasn't easy but we stuck to it and it made our wedding night mean so much more to us. There's no way that I would marry someone without having sex first even though we obstaned from sex for the 2 months we had plenty of crazy sex before that

[SoMuchNut]

Not talking about sex is how you wind up with problems.

[AngelLily]

I think it would be a good idea to talk about it also the reason those marriages didn't last where probably because sex was to much of a big deal for some of those people while others might of not even wanted to do anything.

[Browneye57]

If you're waiting for marriage for religious reasons, just find someone like-minded and plan it together.

Otherwise, yes, if you miss the compatibility issue you sign yourself up for a lifetime of frustration and disappointment.

My first wife thought cooking cleaning and fucking were three cities in China. She's history. LOL

[Massageman]

Of course you will have to have "that talk". How will they know your wishes if you don't discuss it. Hopefully, you will find someone nice who is on the same page as you.

[HawkPerception]

It's always healthy to communicate, no matter what the topic is on. It's actually better to share your thoughts on what you both expect sex to be and any little fantasies or desires you have so you'll both be satisfied if/when you get married.