Fake Virgins
I was thinking about this last night and decided I had to write about it because it bugs me.
There are a group of girls out there in the big, bad world (I don’t know how many are in this elite group). They are to some extent, Jesus freaks, meaning that according to their religion, they’re supposed to be virgins when they marry.
Because of that, these girls don’t have sex. Wait a minute, did I say don’t have sex? Let’s revise that. These girls don’t fuck. They don’t have intercourse. No slamming the salami or whatever other crude term there is for the actual penetration stuff.
However, these girls do everything else but (and butt could be included).
What pisses me off about this is that in my book, having no sex means NO sex, no blow jobs, no petting, no hand jobs…. nothing. If they’ve got such a commitment to their religion and not having sex until marriage, why is it that they’re doing everything else?
To me that seems like a bastardization of the entire meaning of “saving yourself til marriage”. I don’t believe that it was meant to mean that you could be a big slut with every part of your being as long as your hymen was still in tact.
I don’t know about you, but to me saving yourself means saving every little bit of yourself, every sexual experience for that guy you’re making the holy union with.
I think these girls are bigger whores than the neighbourhood *um* whore because they’re pretending that they’re still good girls (virgins) who haven’t had sex.
The thought of it pisses me off even though I was never a believer in saving myself for marriage. Maybe it’s just the stinking hypocrisy that pisses me off. Hypocrites. Sluts.
Did you enjoy this post? Why not leave a comment below and continue the conversation, or subscribe to my feed and get articles like this delivered automatically to your feed reader.
Comments
I couldn’t agree with you more. I’m all for cramming in as much sex before marriage as a person feels comfortable with, but don’t be a hypocrite about it.
I have known these girls. What’s really interesting is that the guys who wind up fooling around with those girls *never* respect them, and the men that the girls wind up marrying tend to not know about their… uh… previous exploits.
Funny thing, though. They often wind up marrying guys who can’t fulfill their sexual needs or ones who are so completely about sex that they can’t fulfill the emotional ones.
It’s a lose/lose situation. They have my pity more than anything else.
~FG };^>
[...] The second one is Idiot on a Stick. As I was checking out the available blogs, this one hit me with a wonderful rant about “Fake Virgins”, the girls who call themselves good Christians (often, but not always Catholic) and so do everything but penetration. Well, I’ve known girls like that and I’ve seen what happens to them, how could I keep my mouth shut? I mean really. [...]
So, where is the line? You say saving yourself should be….hold on let me get it right..”saving yourself means saving every little bit of yourself”. So please shed some light on this, every little bit of yourself. I honestly want to know.
Is she a slut if she goes down, ok you say yes.
Handjob, sure shes a slut you mentioned that.
How about kissing, just simply kissing? Cause that is going to fall into every little bit. What if she caresses him, or lets him hold her tight, or just snuggling on the couch, is she still a slut because she isn’t saving “every little bit”
Further if you kiss a guy on the first date have you had sex? Because kissing is part of “every sexual experience”. So if you kiss someone you have had sex?
The problem here is you are deciding for other people where the line for what is an what is not sex, but it’s not you decision.
For some other religions woman can’t even show their face, in others you have to have sex through a hole in a sheet, but none of this really has to do with religion does it. I know you prefaced it with blaming christianity for this trend but this is the type of situation I see in people without faith as much as those with. You are confusing personal moral standards with religious beliefs.
Also why exactly do you have to use the extremely negative “Jesus freaks” which is a bigotted term when refering to christians. It is meant to be negative and derogatory way of refering to a religion, you could simply say Christian when making the unfounded stereotype. But at the end of the day you are using a negative term meant to tear down and redicule another group by showing an intentional lack of respect. It is a bigoted term. Do you call Jewish people Kikes? It’s the same thing, a disparaging offensive slang meant to degrade another group of people. Just thought you should be a little careful before throwing out more bigotted terms before you accidentally start calling people niggers or towel heads or crackers or kikes or whatever other term. Just food for thought. But I will give you the benefit of the doubt that you didn’t realize how offensive something like that could be.
Well, Ryan, IP: 63.65.68.246, it shouldn’t be too tough to know where the line is. Kissing is NOT sex, although it may be a prelude and something done during sex, it doesn’t qualify as sex.
You cross the line when you start doing “sexual” things… things that give you sexual pleasure, like yada yada yada, my list of things that are sexual.
If these girls were being true to their religious teachings, and saving themselves for marriage, then they wouldn’t be basing their virginity on an intact hymen, virginity would mean that they had not had sex (in any form) with anyone other than the person they are marrying since it’s supposed to be a spiritual union.
If I were a guy, thinking that I was marrying a virgin because that was also my belief, I’d be pretty unhappy to somehow find out that she’d blown the entire east coast.
And I’m sure that it doesn’t take a lot of brainpower to realize that that’s true, and has nothing to do with me defining where the lines are.
Nowhere did I say that the term “Jesus freaks” was saved solely for Christians. To me it applies to anyone who is caught up in religion for religion’s sake and most often consists of people trying to shove their religion down everybody else’s throat.
In the case of this discussion it deals with hypocrites – people wanting others to believe that they are living within their religious doctrines, and yet they’re not, they’ve found a technicality (you know, the hymen thing) and are not living the doctrine as it was meant. Is it ok to get fucked up the ass because technically you can still say you’re a virgin?
If you look up the word “freak”, one of the definitions you’ll find is “addict: someone who is so ardently devoted to something that it resembles an addiction; ‘a golf addict’; ‘a car nut’; ‘a bodybuilding freak’; ‘a news junkie’.”
So I don’t understand why you’d have a problem with the term, Jesus freak, unless, of course, you are one and don’t like to come to terms with that. Regardless, bigotry and racism don’t fit here, and I will continue to use the term “Jesus freak” or any other type of freak, as it applies.
Well I will address a few things.
Your words ” You cross the line when you start doing “sexual” things… things that give you sexual pleasure” so is it your opinion that you have never had sexual pleasure from kissing? You never have had sexual pleasure from someone holding you or caressing your face? If this is true you have been dating the wrong people and honestly I feel kinda bad for you. But the point is not whether or not a BJ is in fact sex, it’s that you have defined a line for yourself, and you are applying that to others. I know people who do consider kissing especially pationate kissing, making out, whatever you want to call it, sexual in nature and would chose not to do it before marriage. Thier line is different than yours and they would consider kissing a sexual act, would it then be fair for them to call you a whore because you kiss someone? No of course not. I take issue with you assigning virginity to someone else based on your set of standards.
What if a guy marrying a girl had made out with dozens of women cause he didn’t think that was unpure, but she thought it was? What if he had kissed the entire east coast? Would she be justified in being upset over this just as in your example the guy would be upset over the BJs? Don’t you see it is completely about drawing lines? What about two people who aren’t virgins, but the girl had slept with about 4 guys and the guy had slept with over 100 women, not practicing safe sex, again you are not talking about beliefs you are talking about personal moral standands and lines of what people consider acceptable sexual behavior. It doesn’t take alot of brainpower, as you put it, to see this is clearly the case.
Now here is where you show me something where I understand you are pretty clueless about religion.
“Nowhere did I say that the term “Jesus freaks” was saved solely for Christians”
Well, apparently you need something cleared up, look at the word christianity, what is the root of the word, you got it CHRIST as in JESUS CHRIST. So to believe in Jesus you are then by definition christian. So to be a “freak” about Christ, you would be definitively christian, hence you don’t have to say that the term Jesus (CHRIST) Freak refers to CHRISTians, because it definitively could not refer to anyone else. So now that you are clear on that.
So is it your opinion that any Christian, any person who believes in God and Christ are in fact addicted or “someone who is so ardently devoted to something that it resembles an addiction”. Is it your opinion that anyone who believes in Christ is an addict? Are you actually so misinformed as to think that believing in something is akin to being addicted to it? Also as I can see you used dictionary.com I will use their entire definition rather than editing out the part that suits my point of view….
freak
n 1: a person or animal that is markedly unusual or deformed [syn: monster, monstrosity, lusus naturae] 2: someone who is so ardently devoted to something that it resembles an addiction; “a golf addict”; “a car nut”; “a news junkie” [syn: addict, nut, junkie, junky] v : lose one’s nerve; “When he saw the accident, he freaked out” [syn: freak out, gross out]
So Freak could just as easily and more than likely be taken as someone who is markedly unusual or deformed, as that is the common and primary usage of the word. Does believing in Christ make someone a monster?
Do you still not understand why someone would take issue with the term Jesus Freak, are you honestly saying you don’t understand how someone could be insulted by that? Seriously you can’t grasp that?
I am not a Jesus Freak, I am not sure yet what I am, I am actually wresting with my beliefs in God. I do know however that I have good friends that are devout Christians, I do have friend that are Muslims, I do have friends that are Aethiests, I do have friends that are Pagans. I also know I treat all of them with respect and don’t make assumptions on who they are based on their religious beliefs and I treat them with respect and know better than to use a derogatory term to discribe their beliefs.
So if you chose to use words like Jesus Freak, Kike, Nigger or any other slang that you have chosen to defend, then that is your choice, I can’t stop you from being a bigot. I am just hoping rather than simply looking to defend your position on BJs you take the time to be a little introspective and take a look at the terminology you choose to use and understand that people could find it offensive.
Ryan, not only is your comment ridiculously long, but instead of arguing logically, you choose to go to extremes, e.g., “anyone who believes in Christianity is a Jesus freak… a monster…”.
Look at the definition of ADDICTED and you will see that just because someone believes in something, it doesn’t make them a freak or an addict. And calling someone a freak/addict is not the same as using some ethnic slur, the likes of which you seem to be fond of typing onto my blog. If I said someone was a cocaine freak, I don’t think anyone would be taking offense at that (except, of course, for the cocaine freak who wouldn’t accept that they had a problem).
I’ve already made my point with this post, and quite a few people seem to see it the same way. If you don’t like it, that’s your choice; maybe you’d like to believe that some skank isn’t a skank because she didn’t actually have intercourse. But then when the only reason she didn’t do that is under the guise of religion… ‘a rose by any other name’… True religious belief has nothing to do with ‘finding the loopholes’.
And as far as kissing goes, it’s not a sexual act, regardless of whether it’s been good and caused sexual arousal. It doesn’t cause sexual pleasure, meaning orgasm, just arousal if it’s good. And believe me, you certainly don’t have to “feel bad for me” because I’ve been having sex for over 30 years, and I know the difference between good and bad, having experienced both.
I am not “wrestling with what I believe”, I already know what I think and will write about it if and when I feel like it. If my terminology offends you, it’s really tough shit isn’t it? That’s what the little “X” at the top of your browser is for.
Good luck in finding yourself.
OfFS, Dirty stinking sluts who do every thing except vaginal actual fucking?
I’m just shocked that anyone is so incensed enough to give a shit about it.
On the other hand, (where’s that been and who licked it), what does a male version of this alleged “slut”, do or “not” do, that could be interesting reading, or not.
Jesus Freaks:- Long haired, German minibus driving, friends of the holy lord himself.
Religious freaks:- Fucking nutters who blow up stuff in the name of some false god or prophet, and who have long hair and drive American minivans, friends of Osama himself
idiotonastick
Minna
Dave Barker
I used Moneris for over two years. I recently terminated due to a merchant compliance requiremen t – Moneris began...
Maria
just another
Female, taken, fire, Sagittarius, Monkey, Toronto, two kids, one grandson, IT.
55
is the new 30. I want the world to close their mouths when they’re eating or chewing gum. If they don’t, I want to elbow them in the face.
Oh, I hear ya and I’m actually quite astonished that they actually brag about not having “sex” but yet they do other sexual stuff.