By Tom Quiner
You live in a culture obsessed with sex. Have you noticed?
Sex. Sex. Sex.
Porn sites abound. Sex is used to sell product. Children are sexualized at a young age. It’s hard not to gape at the spectacle of Miley Cyrus evolving from a cute girl into a proud slut in a few short years.
So we can agree, sex is very important to the American culture. Scientists conducted a study to learn how couples can enjoy better sex. They discovered the secret and revealed the results in the American Psychological Association’s Journal of Family Psychology.
They were able to quantify the results after interviewing 2035 married individuals. There is a powerful technique couples can use to increase:
• relationship stability by 22 percent,
• relationship satisfaction by 20 percent.
• sexual quality by 15 percent, and
• communication by 12 percent.
The secret? Abstinence.
Couples that waited to consummate their love until after they were married experience more filling relationships in and out of bed.
I knew this guy who once told me that “pre marital gratification” was a requirement when he was dating his wife-to-be. He married her. She produced several kids for him. And then he dumped her.
Yes, I know, there are couples who engage in premarital sex who have wonderful marriages. And there are others who abstain, and yet their marriages don’t last.
Waiting says something very important to a woman. A man who says that he is willing to wait before experiencing the beauty of conjugal love with his sweetheart reveals a level of profound respect for her.
A man who demands “pre-marital gratification” reveals a self-centeredness that may be an impediment to a relationship that lasts. Researchers have quantified the difference, and the benefits of waiting are significant.
One of my favorite bloggers is a guy named Matt Walsh. He received an e-mail relevant to this conversation. The e-mail came from a college professor who not only doesn’t believe in abstinence, he believes that a “monogamous heterosexual relationship is a largely unattainable (and undesirable) myth.”
The professor comes on strong in his case for sexual promiscuity, even within marriage:
Sexual unions between humans are not meant to be permanent. As we evolve, so does our understanding of these truths. Monogamy is not simply unrealistic; it is unnatural. You do not find it often in the animal kingdom, and where you do it is generally born of an evolutionary necessity. The necessity of monogamy among humankind has evaporated. This is particularly true of men, who are simply not biologically fitted for the “one woman” life.
You could use your platform for good but instead you use it to make those in open and poly relationships feel subhuman. Beyond the latent racism and sexism in your writings, it is your constant reinforcement of archaic relationship models that really does the profoundest of damage. Before you jump to any conclusions allow me to tell you this: I am married. I’ve been married for 15 years and my wife and I both sleep with other people. We are honest about this, which makes our open relationship more healthy than “monogamous” relationships built on lies.
Judge my choices if you like, but when you inevitably cheat on your wife, and then continue to sermonize about the sacredness of monogamous unions, I will return the favor.
Mr. Walsh responds with his usual logic and clarity:
Monogamy is not natural. You’re right about that.
It’s above our nature. It might not be realistic. Space flight isn’t realistic, either. If I wanted to be natural, I could live in a hole like a rodent, eat insects, and scamper from one mate to the next, until, after a life of nothingness, I die alone in the cold darkness, decomposing into the dirt without anyone ever noticing. That would be natural. It’s probably pretty realistic, too. So it is fortunate that I am a human being and I am given the chance to transcend the existence of a rat or a lizard. I have the opportunity to experience supernatural things like love, and sacrifice, and commitment.
You say that men are especially ill-suited for monogamy. We are not “biologically fitted” for it. What does that mean, Professor? Do you go about your day and, before deciding on any particular course of action, ask yourself if it is something you are “biologically fitted” to do? I would say we are biologically fitted to be rational beings. And, as rational beings, we are capable of attaining higher things. Monogamy and loyalty are higher things. But are they more difficult for men? I can’t fathom why that should be the case.
[Read the whole post here.]
The professor suggests that men and women are little more than lust-filled animals incapable of any sort of restraint. And yet there is no shortage of honorable men and women who DO JUST THAT.
They confine their love-making, for that’s what is, the giving of the themselves, to marriage.
Scientists tell us these are the most fulfilling relationships around, which can include hot sex.
But sex is just one piece of the puzzle. That’s what the culture misses. When it is decoupled from love, it becomes base.
When saved for marriage, it builds stronger, healthier relationships.
And when the marriage is sacramental, the sex act is truly divine.