Dear Wendy
Dear Wendy

Friday Links, May 10

Here are a few things from around the web that may interest you:

Here’s Addie Pray’s boyfriend tormenting children again.

“My Wedding Hair” [via The New Yorker]

Hey, 80s babies: “Every Every Every Generation Has Been the Me Me Me Generation” [The Atlantic]

“Why I Froze My Eggs (And You Should, Too)” [via WSJ]

Apparently “pinterest stress” is a thing now. [via Today.com]

My brother Danny lost his virginity at age 25. To a call girl named Monique. Hired by our mother. “My Brother, My Mother, and a Call Girl” [via The Hairpin]

“My virginity mistake” [via Salon]

“How to Not Hate Dating” [via The Atlantic]

“Why dads pass on paid paternity leave” [via Market Watch]

Thank you to those who submitted links for me to include. If you see something around the web you think DW readers would appreciate, please send me a link to [email protected] and if it’s a fit, I’ll include it in Friday’s round-up. Thanks!

You can follow me on Facebook here and sign up for my weekly newsletter here.

81 comments… add one
  • avatar

    Addie Pray May 10, 2013, 1:18 pm

    My crush on Jimmy Kimmel is getting BAD you guys. I just love him so.

    Reply Link
  • avatar

    kerrycontrary May 10, 2013, 1:34 pm

    Ok debate: Is it selfish for people to have kids in their late 40s? Like the woman in the egg-freezing article. If she has her first kid at 44 (if her frozen eggs work), she’ll be 62 when they graduate high-school. My parents were in their late 50s when i graduated high-school (they had my siblings earlier) and that has posed its own challenges. This women’s kids most likely won’t know their grandparents, and if they do it will only be for a short amount of time. They may have to take care of their parents physically/mentally at a young age when they aren’t yet financially stable. What do other people think?

    Reply Link
    • avatar

      scattol May 10, 2013, 1:49 pm

      I’ve been arguing this for a while with the DW crowd but not really gotten anywhere. The tradeoff are loaded and at the disadvantage of the kids. Of course if you have to wait then wait but it’s not without it’s drawback.

      Reply Link
    • lynn

      lynn May 10, 2013, 1:50 pm

      Idk to each their own. But — and this is nothing against Moms who had kids in their 30s and 40s…. I have zero interest in having a child after 31. I know anything can happen, but I want my parents to be around, my guys parents, hopefully my own grandparents… I also want to relatively “young” whenever my kids graduate high school and college. I want to be like my parents.

      Reply Link
      • avatar

        kerrycontrary May 10, 2013, 1:54 pm

        My parents had me at 36, they had my siblings at 26 and 28. While it’s not something I think about a lot and its really not a huge deal, I definitely wish they had me younger (but I was an accident, what can you do). Thankfully my grandparents are still around due to amazing longevity. But my parents are older now and I’m only in my 20s. They can’t help me move or do anything physically. I have to worry when we walk a mile when they come visit (in reality they should be in better shape). They were “over” being parents by the time I was a teen and I could tell. I want to have my kids earlier so I can be around and be young. I also don’t want to have to wait until my late 50s/early 60s to have an empty nest.

        Link
      • Copa

        Copa May 10, 2013, 2:06 pm

        I think the issues you have with your parents really a lot vary between individuals. My parents were 34 (turned 35 later that same year) when I was born. I’m glad they waited. They were better off financially when they had me, which definitely had its benefits. They’ve always been able to help me move (and did so recently even in their early 60s). Many of my good friends’ parents are similar. To each their own, and though I’m undecided about kids generally, I wouldn’t want kids before 30.

        Link
      • avatar

        kerrycontrary May 10, 2013, 2:30 pm

        It is true that my parents were better off financially when they had me (my mom went back to work after being a SAHM for 7 years). So that’s a good point.

        Link
      • Skyblossom

        Skyblossom May 10, 2013, 2:16 pm

        I was 29 when my son was born and 38 when my daughter was born. I had more energy with my son and he got more one on one attention. We have more income now and have spent more money on our daughter. Life isn’t fair and even in the same family no two kids are going to get exactly the same of everything.

        Part of your concern, and it is valid, is the health of the parents. We’re healthy and involved in our kids lives and I don’t think we’d have trouble helping her move when she is in her twenties. Also, if her brother lives in the same area he would help. My parents are both healthy and my dad is 80 so we have some good genetic material. My youngest uncle was 25 when my grandfather died and 29 when my grandmother died so he had no parents by the time he was 30 so I do understand your concern. When you hear about young people moving back in with their parents he certainly lost that safety net early but I don’t think he would say that his life sucked so bad that he would rather not have been born and I think my daughter enjoys her life and would rather be her than not be here.

        Given the choice I would have had my children closer together but we had secondary infertility and had given up hope of a second child when we had her. I would have opted for the second child at a younger age just because I had more energy and it affects a career less to have the kids closer together. We were pleased and felt lucky to have her at 38 and don’t regret her at all. This is one of those situations where I can definitely see both sides.

        Link
      • avatar

        ktfran May 10, 2013, 2:07 pm

        That’s what I thought too, until life happened and I decided I would rather be happy then marry the wrong man because of some self imposed timeline.

        But you are totally right, to each their own.

        Link
      • Jess

        Jess May 10, 2013, 3:49 pm

        For full disclosure, I am 37 and trying to have my first child. But with that said, I do find this debate interesting and don’t feel judgmental about it on either side.

        I guess what I would want to add is that we might want to make a distinction between those that wait for the sake of waiting (for example married at 28 but delay having kids until 36) vs those that just don’t have the opportunity until they’re older.

        I think it’s great to have a goal of being a parent by 31. My own goal was similar. But in reality, I found myself single at 31 after a long term relationship had ended. I remember thinking a lot about my chances for having a kid at that time. Would I meet someone in time? And so forth. I told myself that finding a good partner was more important to me than my biological clock. I reminded myself that I could always adopt if it came to that. Or just be a great aunt to my sister’s kids! In the end, I was lucky enough to meet my (soon to be) husband when I was 34. We’re marrying next month and are starting on the baby trail right away. We’re likely to get pregnant before we’ve been together 3 years. I would love to have more time together to travel and be married as a twosome only but we know biology is not on our side.

        I say this not from a defensive place but only to point out how life has a way of turning these plans on their head and the age of parenthood is not something we entirely control. There are also people who take years to get pregnant because of fertility issues.

        The other side of the coin are those who wait just to wait. Or maybe those who decide at 45 and single that they want to do it on their own. These are perhaps more extreme cases. Most people I know who are trying to conceive in their mid-late 30s have only recently met their partners.

        Link
      • avatar

        lets_be_honest May 10, 2013, 3:53 pm

        All really good points. I agree that people who wait for the sake of waiting only are likely the most extreme case of late in life conceptions.

        Link
      • avatar

        kerrycontrary May 10, 2013, 3:53 pm

        I agree Jess. I think that many people have great life plans but life gets in the way. And no one’s life turns out the way they planned it. I more mean people who wait for the sake of waiting, or like the lady from the article who stuck with an indecisive partner for years in her 30s.

        Link
    • avatar

      Sasa May 10, 2013, 1:58 pm

      My first thought is that egg freezing is a very elite thing and that the women who are doing it are probably able to finance private care at home and whatnot when they’re old, so the kids probably wouldn’t be burdened by that. I don’t have any moral objections to older parents – I don’t think that people who, for whatever reason, have a shorter life expectancy shouldn’t have kids, and it’s a parallel case. Like, would you object to someone having a kid at 30 if they had a higher chance of dying early than others? I’m just really baffled by the whole egg freezing thing and I’m wondering what kind of life one must live to see this as a real option. I would hate to have to go to such lengths to make childbearing match with other life goals.

      Reply Link
    • avatar

      lets_be_honest May 10, 2013, 2:45 pm

      I think a lot of people want to have kids based around the time their parents had them. Like, its just what they know, so it seems right. Ironically, I had mine at 21 and my mom had me at 21. Not planned that way, obviously, but it is kinda cool and I do like having and being a young parent.

      Reply Link
      • avatar

        lets_be_honest May 10, 2013, 2:47 pm

        Its also nice having grandparents still around.

        Link
    • Miel

      Miel May 10, 2013, 3:10 pm

      I guess it’s selfish only when the parents are very old, like 50 or 60 and over (for a dad). Sometimes you hear about those (male) celebrities that remarry and have a kid at 62-63… That’s old. They might not see their kid turn 20, even while staying healthy and away from accidents.

      But parents at 35 or 40 ? That’s ok, that’s not selfish at all. Like others said, they might be in a better financial situation than other parents. They might be able to save up for their retirement AND college tuition, while having a fully paid house, or something like that.

      My mom had me at 40, while my dad was 45. I did many things with them (traveling, camping, sports). The things I wouldn’t do with them (like… rock climbing) I would do it with my siblings (they are 15-16 years older than me) and they were the “coolest” replacement parents I could have asked for. Sometimes my brother and sister would come and pick me after school, and to my 7 years old classmates, it would look like Dave Grohl and Cameron Diaz were my baby sitters. Now my parents are retired, still very much in shape (they’re in the mid-60s) and we spend much more time together since I have some day off school in uni, and we spend them home all together, etc. So a kid can have a great time with “older” parents, it’s just a very different relationship.

      Reply Link
    • avatar

      rachel May 10, 2013, 3:41 pm

      I think that there are so many unknowns in life that if you want a kid and you will do the best you can to give him/her a good life, then just do it. You could have kids young and something horrible happens, or have them old and be one of those people that’s going strong into their 80’s. There’s really no way of knowing.

      Reply Link
      • avatar

        lets_be_honest May 10, 2013, 3:44 pm

        I agree. I also think that you don’t have to be super duper financially secure before you should have kids. As long as you can provide a roof over their heads, food, and plenty of love, then go for it.

        Link
    • avatar

      Riefer May 12, 2013, 7:41 am

      I don’t see how it’s any more selfish than having kids in general. If you have them when you’re young, your finances aren’t good, you’re still figuring out your life, and you’re trying to raise them in that environment. Not to mention that it’s much more common for couples who are married young to get divorced, so you’re increasing the risk that your kids will end up in the middle of that. There are so many pros and cons on both sides.

      Also, I only had 2 grandparents growing up because my dad was an orphan, and it wasn’t a big deal. And we didn’t see those 2 all that much because they didn’t live that close. We saw my aunt much more, she was like part of the immediate family (still is). In the end, I don’t think it matters if kids specifically have their grandparents around, as long as they have supportive adults around, which could be parents’ friends, or aunts and uncles, or teachers, or whatever.

      Reply Link
  • Jess

    Jess May 10, 2013, 1:44 pm

    On the 80’s babies thing, I and many others here have been trying to say THIS forever, “Basically, it’s not that people born after 1980 are narcissists, it’s that young people are narcissists, and they get over themselves as they get older.”

    EXACTLY. So stop pointing fingers at this generation or that generation. I hate hearing about the “me generation.” It has no meaning when every generation gets the same label. It’s a developmental phase and some experience it more than others.

    Love from,
    a 70s baby

    Reply Link
    • avatar

      kerrycontrary May 10, 2013, 1:51 pm

      I also really like the point that journalists are surrounded by unpaid interns, who by necessity are either having their rent paid by their parents are are still living with their parents. And are usually wealthy. And they most likely have a liberal arts degree with makes them unemployable, in student debt, or both! So I liked this article a lot.

      Reply Link
      • Jess

        Jess May 10, 2013, 2:14 pm

        Yeah I agree. I had never considered that. My reactions while reading it were full of, “Yes!” and “Finally!” and, “Thank you!

        Link
    • sobriquet

      sobriquet May 10, 2013, 3:33 pm

      Yay! I submitted this article. Puts the whole ’80’s Baby’ debate to bed. Turns out we’re ALL narcissists in our 20’s, we just have different ways of going about it.

      Reply Link
    • avatar

      Painted_lady May 10, 2013, 4:01 pm

      Oh my god, yes. It’s all just a really eloquent way of saying, “Kids these days!” Which EVERY generation since the dawn of time has said. What’s always confused me is how every single generation has no idea that every preceding generation has said it. And if you point it out? “Well, yes, but this time it’s true!!!” Which every generation has also said. And has also been sure that the current generation’s new technology is going to be the downfall of society.

      Reply Link
    • avatar

      ele4phant May 11, 2013, 2:34 pm

      Yes agreed. I’m not bothered to hear that twenty-something’s have our heads up our asses (we do!) but it really grinds my gears to here from older generations that there is something particularly awful about our generation, that when *they* were our age they were productive hard working civically minded members of society. You were just like us, just with less electronics to play with.

      Reply Link
  • avatar

    rachel May 10, 2013, 1:55 pm

    I loved the call girl article. What a wonderful, caring mother.

    Reply Link
    • CatsMeow

      CatsMeow May 10, 2013, 1:57 pm

      It gave me goosebumps and brought tears to my eyes.

      Reply Link
      • avatar

        Sasa May 10, 2013, 2:05 pm

        I kind of wondered whether Danny really wanted to have sex! I don’t think they should just have assumed that.
        And I was weirded out by the mother’s focus on whether he could procreate. What?

        Link
      • sobriquet

        sobriquet May 10, 2013, 3:31 pm

        Yeah, the only part I didn’t like was her focus on him having children. It actually sounds like that’s the reason she hired the call girl- to see if he was capable of ejaculation. Kind of selfish and unrealistic if you ask me (and I mention that because she calls herself a “realist” at the very end).

        Link
    • avatar

      bethany May 10, 2013, 2:51 pm

      I dunno… I mean, I like that his mother wanted him to experience all parts of life, but I’m Sasa… Was sex even something he was interested in? Lots of people aren’t. If it was really something he wanted to experience, then yes, I think that’s awesome that she did that for him, but if it was the mother wanting it for him, then it just seems weird to me.

      Reply Link
      • avatar

        bethany May 10, 2013, 2:52 pm

        *I meant: “I’m with Sasa”

        Link
      • avatar

        lets_be_honest May 10, 2013, 2:53 pm

        Uh oh, we got a Sasa impersonator!

        Link
      • avatar

        rachel May 10, 2013, 3:36 pm

        I get that, but I think, he went along with it, so he probably did want it. Sex is a part of life that it would be sad not to experience, so I think even if her reasons were a little selfish, it was great that he got that chance.

        Link
      • avatar

        lets_be_honest May 10, 2013, 3:39 pm

        I don’t think “going along with it” always translates to wanting it.

        Link
      • avatar

        bethany May 10, 2013, 3:51 pm

        I think it’s my lack of “Spring in my hot pocket” talking.
        🙁

        I’m sure a few years ago I would have thought this was great. Uugh.

        Link
      • Fabelle

        Fabelle May 10, 2013, 3:58 pm

        Yeahh, I’m not a fan of that whole story, actually? A bunch of things did not sit right with me, reading that. 1., the way the mother went about it. It’s presented as a “go, gurll” thing, but DUDE. I think it’s a bit messed up that she doesn’t discuss anything with the father?And the fact that she doesn’t even really ask the son is an issue of consent, obviously (plus the weird fixation of his capability to ejaculate…)

        2. Yes, I think the sex drives of people like Danny are sadly ignored in society. But I also don’t think sex is such a ~necessary~ experience that things like, um, consent? should be ignored.

        Link
      • avatar

        rachel May 10, 2013, 5:26 pm

        I’m not sure why you would think he didn’t consent. Even if he was uncomfortable with the idea of a prostitute and just let his mother hire her to make her happy…he didn’t have to have sex with her.

        I can get why people are grossed out by it, but I think she meant well.

        Link
  • avatar

    L May 10, 2013, 1:58 pm

    In regards to the virginity article…I’m waiting for marriage to have sex (both personal reasons and religious reasons) but I can tell with my boyfriend, for example, I have a LOT of chemistry. We kiss with a bit of touching. That alone really awakens my hot pocket (see what I did there? Ha). Though I agree chemistry is important in a relationship, I think in this particular case the fact that she was so young had a lot to do with it. It seemed as though because she didn’t know what exactly what she was looking for. I’m VERY different now at 25 than I was at 20, and I know I approach relationships in a much different way now than I would have when I was 20. I’m not saying that waiting is THE answer because obviously everyone is different, but I’m saying I do think it IS possible to know if you have chemistry or not without having sex before getting married.

    Reply Link
    • veritek33

      veritek33 May 10, 2013, 2:10 pm

      Yes. Just yes. One must know what they are looking for!

      Reply Link
    • avatar

      SasaLinna May 10, 2013, 2:15 pm

      I’m not criticizing your choice, but want to offer another perspective. Having chemistry definitely makes for a good start. But in my experience, chemistry isn’t enough to have a good sex life. Personally, I also need to be into the same things – or at least have sufficient overlap of sexual preferences, and not too much of a diverging libido. I guess that could also partially be found out through talking, or it may not be as important to everyone. But it’s something to consider.

      Reply Link
      • avatar

        kerrycontrary May 10, 2013, 2:33 pm

        I agree. And I don’t think people can know what they are into until they actually go through the act. I don’t think this can be done through talking.

        Link
      • avatar

        SasaLinna May 10, 2013, 2:38 pm

        Yeah that’s probably true. I also imagine couples who wait for sex not to be the ones who have detailed conversations about what they’re into, how often they like to have sex etc., but I might be wrong.

        Link
      • avatar

        *HmC* May 10, 2013, 3:24 pm

        Well if you’re waiting until marriage to have sex and so is your significant other, then your whole viewpoint on sexual preferences and libido is different. You are navigating new territory together, with the express understanding that you are both discovering it all for the first time. You have that in common. Some could argue that that in itself bonds people in a way that makes it worth not having worked out all of your preferences on other people.

        You definitely can determine chemistry, sometimes almost right away. And yes, sometimes you are majorly attracted to someone and sex is a bummer. But if you’re waiting until marriage, that is a whole different commitment and context then just being disappointed in sex with a casual partner or even boyfriend. Ideally, a big part of that would be an understanding that compromises will have to be made no matter what, and that some mystery is worth the risk to you, for the benefit you feel you are getting.

        My point is that neither side is better than the other, they both have advantages and disadvantages.

        Link
      • katie

        katie May 10, 2013, 7:05 pm

        but the bottom line is no matter how prepared/committed you are, and your partner is, if the sex is bad, its bad. there is only so much two people can do to work on it, and if you cant… well, you cant. the only way to know you are sexually compatible is to have sex. thats just reality, thats it. so, its a gamble that people take to wait. you are gambling your potential for a good sex life against the commitment you make. im *sure* a lot of people make it work, because they are committed to it, but im also sure that it falls apart for a lot of people to, because, like i said, the only way to know is to do it. “theoretical experience” is not a real thing, and “theoretical promises” is, to me, not a gamble i would take.

        its like if you wanted to buy a car, but you never test drove it (and i know, i know, the sex = test drive thing is overdone, but stay with me). you can research all you want, prepare all you want, learn how to theoretically change the oil, repair a flat tire, you can make the commitment with your loan company and your insurance company- but once you get it home and drive it, if you hate it, there is only so much you can do to make you not hate it. the only way to make sure you like it is to actually drive it.

        Link
      • avatar

        *HmC* May 10, 2013, 7:19 pm

        but the bottom line is no matter how prepared/committed you are, and your partner is, if they are a bad parent, they’re just bad. there is only so much two people can do to work on it, and if you cant… well, you cant. the only way to know you are parentally compatible with is to have a kid. thats just reality, thats it. so, its a gamble that people take to wait until marriage to have you. you are gambling your potential for a good parenting life against the commitment you make. im *sure* a lot of people make it work, because they are committed to it, but im also sure that it falls apart for a lot of people to, because, like i said, the only way to know is to do it. “theoretical experience” is not a real thing, and “theoretical promises” is, to me, not a gamble i would take.

        Some people just want the commitment of marriage prior to sharing certain things with their significant others. It’s about values and how well YOU feel like you can know someone and their nature based on what you know of them, how much it’s worth it to you to compromise, and how much the gamble is worth it to you vs. how you feel you benefit from waiting. Some people are fine sharing everything- home, children, sex, with a boyfriend/girlfriend. Many people will live together but draw the line at kids. Some want to wait to move in or have kids but will have sex. Some won’t do any of these things. You applying your culture and values to where others draw their line is just as arbitrary as anyone else doing it somewhere else.

        Link
      • katie

        Katie May 10, 2013, 7:37 pm

        Well, first off, I was coming at this from a purely physical limitations of our world place- you can’t experience something without experiencing it, you know?

        And about kids, isn’t that why a lot of people do wait until marriage, because marriage actually has legal protections for those situations? There is no legal protections or anyone, kids included, for a bad sex life, as far as I know anyway.

        I’m not judging, people can do whatever they want, but the bottom line is you can’t know something like sexual compatibility until you actually have sex. That’s just the limitations of reality.

        Link
      • avatar

        *HmC* May 10, 2013, 7:54 pm

        And we as a society choose to provide legal protections to married parents because we want to encourage them to marry before pro-creating, because those are our values. The value to wait came before the legal benefits.

        Link
      • Lyra

        L May 10, 2013, 3:29 pm

        I see your point, I really do. I’m finally getting much more comfortable with saying what I like. My ex and I had a decent amount of foreplay (he was FAR more experienced) and I would almost be afraid to tell him what I wanted. It really wasn’t him, it was me who was flat-out embarrassed to vocalize what I liked. I do believe that it can work either way and that one way or the other isn’t the “right” choice. Open communication can work wonders.

        Link
    • avatar

      kerrycontrary May 10, 2013, 2:38 pm

      I do agree with you L that the issue was her being young. But to me it is out of my comprehension that people go from kissing/some touching to sex in one night. Some people just go from kissing to intercourse? That’s such a jump! And then there’s so much pressure on the whole thing, and sex is a way bigger deal than it needs to be. And everyone in the bridal party or even at the whole wedding knows that they are losing their virginity which is mortifying.

      Reply Link
      • sobriquet

        sobriquet May 10, 2013, 3:27 pm

        Speaking of mortifying, did you know that some guys have bachelor parties that include VIRGINITY pinatas?! My boyfriend has a lot of mormon family members and I’ve seen some disturbing pictures on Facebook. They have a party to celebrate losing their virginity. Can you imagine being the woman in that situation? Sex becomes such a huge deal that the women don’t even enjoy it.

        Link
    • avatar

      EB May 10, 2013, 3:19 pm

      Hmm I hate to be a downer but in my experience a lot of heat in the kissing/heavy petting stage did not always translate to amazing sexual chemistry once the relationship progessed.

      Reply Link
    • Miel

      Miel May 10, 2013, 3:28 pm

      I think chemistry can give a good idea of what the sex life might be, that’s true. What makes me cringe a bit with women like the one in the article is how their sex life seems to start from thin air on their wedding night. Like they never talked about it before. Like they never experimented with physical pleasure before, except for precipitated hormonal urges and some kissing.

      I’m ok with keeping penetrative sex for after marriage (that’s a personal choice. It wasn’t mine, but I accept other taking that path), but that’s far from being the only thing in sex. What about massages ? What about talking about fantasies ? What about masturbation ? Two individuals can “stay virgin” and still have a great sensual connection with each other, if not a sexual connection already. I just feel like it’s so dumb to think one day you’re kissing, and the next day you’ll be able to orgasm with that person. Those things ask for so much more than love and physical attraction ! And liking the same day activities and having a similar sense of humor says nothing about how you’ll interact in bed.

      I just wish some people would make choice about their sexuality without falling into the “sex = taboo” thing. If people could talk and experiment with their partner, guilt free, I think they would make the choice that fits them the most, instead of going blindly into something they will end up hating.

      Reply Link
      • sobriquet

        sobriquet May 10, 2013, 3:38 pm

        When I was in high school my church had a “True Love Waits” conference that basically taught that even big hugs were too scandalous because they led to feelings of lust. You weren’t supposed to even HUG or kiss beyond a peck. I bet the couples who live by those rules have magical sex lives…

        Link
      • avatar

        SasaLinna May 10, 2013, 3:38 pm

        That’s a good point. Actually if all that “waiting for sex” meant was “no PIV before marriage” then I don’t think waiting raises any problems whatsoever. But that’s not usually the case right?

        Link
      • Miel

        Miel May 10, 2013, 3:55 pm

        It’s not the case, because most Churches consider sex to be taboo, and not only a bit. The taboo makes people feel uncomfortable with their own body. It makes people in unhealthy situations think they can’t talk about it and reach for help. It creates all sort of health issues with STDs, unwanted pregnancies, infections and incorrect hygiene technique.

        If at least people could be informed and comfortable about the topic of sex, they could be proactive and choose exactly the sort of sex life they want, instead of following the bias-advice of people that are actually very uncomfortable with the whole concept of sex, pleasure and sensuality. I do not know many churches with that attitude, but I would hope more religious community would accept to view sex as a positive, loving gesture, instead of being some dirty reproduction mechanism.

        Link
      • CatsMeow

        CatsMeow May 10, 2013, 4:28 pm

        Yes, but what I don’t get is the weird concentration on PIV. Like how some “virgins” do everything but. Why is PIV *such* a special thing? I love it, don’t get me wrong. But if you’re doing oral on each other, manual stimulation, naked grinding, and other such stuff, then…. isn’t that sex? (My answer is yes. Just ask a lesbian).

        I just don’t really “get” the concept of virginity. I talk to girls with gonorrhea in their throats who tell me they’re virgins. Virgin? Sure, OK. Just not in your throat, honey.

        Link
      • avatar

        SasaLinna May 10, 2013, 4:34 pm

        Yes, most definitely! I wouldn’t see the point of waiting only for PIV at all (except maybe to avoid pregnancy), but I’m a little confused what the boundaries of those who wait for sex are. Basically, the whole waiting thing is foreign to me, as is the concentration on PIV.
        Virginity is essentially a made up concept.

        Link
      • katie

        katie May 10, 2013, 6:57 pm

        virginity is ABSOLUTELY a made up concept that was created by the men and societies of pre-bible times that were written to, at the very base, ensure the inheritance of property/power to only their genetic line. thats it. control over women and inheritance. they were not even in the realm of human’s understanding until people started establishing cities and owning property.

        Link
      • mandalee

        mandalee May 10, 2013, 4:55 pm

        I don’t get the PIV specialness either. I remember the Hairpin did a series on virgins, and one virgin had anal sex but considered herself a virgin because she didn’t go PIV, which confused the hell out of me.

        Link
      • CatsMeow

        CatsMeow May 10, 2013, 5:04 pm

        Right?! Oral, ok… I can see how some/most people say you’re still a virgin after that. But anal? No way, no day.

        Link
      • avatar

        lets_be_honest May 10, 2013, 5:05 pm

        All gay men could claim to be virgins!

        Link
      • mandalee

        mandalee May 10, 2013, 7:06 pm

        Yeah, right? Apparently lesbians and gay men would be virgins by her definition because only PIV counts!

        From a non-religious standpoint, virginity seems like a made up term to make sex seem like this BIG DIRTY DEAL. Apparently oral sex, manual stimulation don’t count, but the moment P goes in the V, it’s this huge thing, which it is from a baby making standpoint, but that’s it. Not even to be snarky, but I’m so confused why many of my younger religious cousins believe that there’s this distinction between everything vs. PIV. I must have missed that religious class that said everything but babymaking sex is fine before marriage.

        STDs can still be transmitted and all that, so even though someone may believe they are a virgin, they are still sexually active. So to me, “sexually active” and “not sexually active” are much better labels than “virgin” and not.

        Link
      • avatar

        *HmC* May 10, 2013, 7:34 pm

        You really don’t see why there would be an odd emphasis on PIV sex? You can get pregnant from PIV sex. I understand that there is highly effective birth control now, but there wasn’t always. So at the very least, you can understand why PIV sex would become important historically and people would inherit that tradition, even if you don’t believe there’s any basis for the distinction now?

        Link
      • mandalee

        mandalee May 10, 2013, 8:43 pm

        Yeah, their are responsibility and life creating aspects that come from PIV sex, but when it comes to virginity it’s silly to think there’s this clear bright line between everything else and insertion. Virginity is often linked to “purity” in religious circles, but if you’re giving blow jobs to your boyfriend and doing everything but, in reality you’re not any more pure than the girl who is PIV’ing every day with her boyfriend, you’re just not as likely to get pregnant, but you’re still sexually active.

        Link
    • mandalee

      mandalee May 10, 2013, 4:51 pm

      Ahh, everyone is different, but I have had many make out partners that rocked my world, only to really turn me off when anything else got started. One guy in particular, I was IN LOVE with in a very unhealthy teenage love way, like the air would vibrate when we even walked into the room. We made out many times that I was sure we had great chemistry. And when we finally had sex a few times…it sucked. So, as someone whose been there, not trying to rain on your parade, but kissing chemistry doesn’t always equal sexual chemistry.

      Reply Link
      • Lyra

        L May 10, 2013, 11:23 pm

        For me, it’s something I don’t want to share with anyone but my future husband. It started as a more religious thing and now it has become a personal thing more so than anything. I simply want a commitment. I’m sure great sex is awesome and all that, but for me open communication, respect, love, commitment, and honesty are more important. As I mentioned above, I’m getting better at talking about my desires and expectations. Of course I won’t know exactly what I like until I try things, but I’m more than willing to talk about it.

        Link
    • mylaray

      mylaray May 10, 2013, 5:11 pm

      I have a question…since you mentioned you have done a lot of foreplay, but not sex, what are your reasons for going further than kissing, but not having sex? I’m honestly just curious, and I hope that doesn’t offend you, and it’s fine if you don’t want to answer. I have friends that will do anythinggg, except PIV sex for religious/personal reasons, and while I can respect anyone’s decisions to wait (I’m a Christian too), I don’t really understand this willingness to do some, but not all.

      Reply Link
      • Lyra

        L May 10, 2013, 11:48 pm

        Foreplay as in all touching — no oral whatsoever. With my ex, ultimately we got into things way too fast for my liking. I’m going verrrrrry slowly with my current boyfriend and the fact that he’s more than willing to go at my pace tells me a lot about him as a person and as a partner. I can’t explain it…I’m just not comfortable with PIV without a commitment. I’m finally getting more comfortable with talking about sex in general. I think a big part of it is the risks — diseases, pregnancy — aren’t worth it to me. Also, part of the reason why I chose to go beyond kissing is that I’m finally realizing that the fact that sex is so taboo in churches is really not all that healthy.

        Link
      • avatar

        Sasa May 11, 2013, 4:25 am

        Sounds like you and your bf have good communication. Going at your own pace is always a good thing.

        Link
  • veritek33

    veritek33 May 10, 2013, 2:17 pm

    The how to not hate dating article was a bit odd. Have confidence and you’ll not hate it. Really? I guess maybe I’m missing something, because I think I’ll always hate dating.

    Reply Link
  • BriarRose

    BriarRose May 10, 2013, 2:20 pm

    The call girl article totally made me tear up at work.

    Reply Link
    • avatar

      scattol May 10, 2013, 5:47 pm

      It’s so touching and well written that I am wondering if it’s not actually fiction. I can’t find any mention of Embassy Suite extended stay rates for instance.

      Still a nice story.

      Reply Link
  • lemongrass

    Lemongrass May 10, 2013, 4:03 pm

    The one on paternity leave didn’t say why men don’t take it , just stats on who do. I’d like to know why men don’t in that situation. My husband is on a 9 month paternity leave right now!

    Reply Link
    • avatar

      lets_be_honest May 10, 2013, 4:06 pm

      WHAT? 9 months?! Is it paid?

      Reply Link
      • lemongrass

        Lemongrass May 10, 2013, 5:07 pm

        Yup! The Canadian govt pays 55% and his job bumps that up to 93%. We’re ahead because our gas bill is lower!

        Link
      • avatar

        lets_be_honest May 10, 2013, 5:13 pm

        How much time/pay do you get?

        Link
      • avatar

        scattol May 10, 2013, 5:32 pm

        She might not get anything. I suspect she isn’t employed which would explain why her husband gets the whole pot. From memory, mat-leave is 50 weeks AND paternal leave is 5 weeks. If the mother isn’t eligible, the father can take the full benefit. The real answer should be here:

        Link
      • lemongrass

        Lemongrass May 10, 2013, 6:24 pm

        Maternity leave is 3 months and parental is 9 months. I’m not taking any parental leave so that my husband can take it all. I’m officially a stay at home mom now.

        Link
    • avatar

      Riefer May 12, 2013, 7:50 am

      In Ontario, the birth mother gets 17 weeks, and then each parent gets their own pot of 35 weeks. You can only get a total of 52 weeks of employment insurance though. So basically, the mother (if she’s the birth mother) can take a full year, the father can take about 9 months, but you only get paid for a total of a year. Although my company bumps it up a bit for me, and my husband’s does for him as well. It’s a good system I think, because say you have a gay male couple – they each can take their 35 weeks, either concurrently or sequentially, and the woman who gave birth to their baby gets her 17 weeks to recover from the pregnancy and birth.

      As to men not taking paternity leave, I only have one friend who is doing it, out of 5 couples I know who have had babies recently. My husband and I are having our first baby soon, and I still don’t know if he’s going to take leave. If he does, he’ll do it after my year is up. But I think there’s too much societal pressure against him taking it. I would be very surprised if he takes 9 months. I’m just hoping he takes at least 3 or so.

      Reply Link
      • avatar

        Riefer May 12, 2013, 7:55 am

        Oh, and how much the govt pays you depends on your salary, because your salary determines how much you have to pay into the system when you’re working. There’s a cap, and my husband and I both hit it, so once my bump-up from work ends I’ll only be getting like 40% of my salary. If you make less money, you get less (although as a percentage of your salary, it’ll be higher since you don’t hit a cap). Still 40% is better than a kick in the ass.

        Link
  • mylaray

    mylaray May 10, 2013, 6:19 pm

    That article about the mother hiring a call girl for her son really angered me. Even though her son had a condition that disabled him a bit, it’s still not his mother’s decision to do those things, in my opinion. He was an adult, and it seems he more went along with the idea of having sex. While I think it is sad for those who don’t get to experience sex, there are plenty of those who don’t know what they are missing. But from the way Danny was described, it didn’t seem like he had any intellectual problems, so if sex is what he wanted, he could have made that choice himself. So I find it odd and disturbing that his mom went out of the way to decide that for him. And yes, I find it weird with her obsession for his ability to ejaculate/have kids. His mother had a vision of who she wants him to be and what she wants for him.

    My boyfriend has a rare, medical disorder-which is nothing like what Danny had-but it is severe and disabling in its own right. My boyfriend’s mom understandably coddled him, and sometimes continues to do so. My boyfriend waited longer than 25 to have sex-he is fully able to have sex, but he wanted to be fully prepared, and it’s pretty common for someone with his disorder to wait. His mom wondered whether he would ever date anyone, had the life she envisioned a child to have, etc. She came to terms that it’s his life and she can’t/won’t control any of those aspects. I think the control thing is very important. My boyfriend very much does not like to lose control/power over things, understandable for someone who has many things taken away. So my problem with the woman in the story is that she seems to take Danny’s control away-and for someone with a medical condition, it can be hard to know what is best for the person, and I don’t think it’s right for anyone to make assumptions of what that person would want.

    Reply Link

Leave a Comment