Has anyone...

[KungFuJoe]

I want to add that this could seriously backfire, too. It would put a HUGE amount of pressure for the "night" to be absolutely mind blowing and nothing dampers sex more than pressure.

[MissBee]

Thats the thing though, I HAVE gone months without seeing someone.

Even though I am using the act of seeing them as the example, it was the sex that was always super intense too.

The crave was stronger, and HIS crave was crazy insane... it just was different than when we did it almost every day.

 

Which is exactly why I think the awesome time to do it would be before our wedding night.

 

I totally get it.

 

I think some people are more into delayed gratification than others.

 

At the end of the day, if you and your fiance thought this was a good idea for you two, then go for it...if other people don't...well...good thing it's not a law being passed forcing anyone else to do so.

[MissBee]

For me, the fact it WAS a honeymoon, and we were so buoyed by everything, and things had been so busy and we felt so very much in love, we really didn't need to have abstained. It was enough in itself, if you see what I mean.

 

(you can tell I'm newly wed, lol)

 

I think this is a matter of preference and how a couple chooses to handle their sex life, which is as personalized as it gets. I don't think the reason why anyone does it is out of a "need" to do it, in the sense that this is the only way they'll have a good honeymoon, but rather, something they thought would be cute/fun/sexy or what have you. And some of the responses, not yours, act like it is some one-sided, forced, thing, when the OP and others have said it would be a mutual decision a couple decides on.

 

Every couple won't be having sex in the same way and will have different likes and needs....if a couple is particularly for delayed gratification, then I think this would be something which they find incredibly gratifying. If they aren't, then it would probably be a bad idea for them. But since it isn't forced and would be something someone in the partnership brings up and the other can say "No way!" or "Hmmm....I like that idea!", as well as they're free to change their minds in between, I don't see how it could be so problematic as some posts have suggested...as though it is the beginning of the end. If it sounds like a bad idea for your relationship, you clearly should not do it...if someone likes the idea and their SO is on board...I'm sure it will be just fine .

[LittleTiger]

Gotten engaged and decided to wait until their wedding night to do it? Even if they had already had intercourse?

 

No, and I wouldn't. Life is too short.

 

I think, when you have some experience of long distance and having to go without sex for weeks or months, you'll probably change your mind.

 

I wouldn't waste a single day of not having sex with the man I love - given the choice.

[MissBee]

No, and I wouldn't. Life is too short.

 

I think, when you have some experience of long distance and having to go without sex for weeks or months, you'll probably change your mind.

 

I wouldn't waste a single day of not having sex with the man I love - given the choice.

 

I have been in LDR and gone without for weeks and months and I've been where I have sex pretty much daily, and I have fancied the idea albeit experiencing both of those scenarios. I think sex is a personal thing, from the kind, to frequency, to what gets people off and the degree of importance in their relationship. There is no right or wrong in this scenario, but whether it is right for that couple or not. One can state it's not their preference without making it seem like the OP is doing something wrong or just "needs more understanding", as it is certainly about preference, and that particular couple's needs versus a universal case of all healthy couples have to have sex everyday or if they don't their relationship will naturally go down the drain.

[miss_jaclynrae]

No, and I wouldn't. Life is too short.

 

I think, when you have some experience of long distance and having to go without sex for weeks or months, you'll probably change your mind.

 

I wouldn't waste a single day of not having sex with the man I love - given the choice.

 

 

 

Not sure how many times I need to say it... I HAVE. I know what it is like. I still will do it.

[xxoo]

I figure it could be a fun way to make that day even MORE special. Not to mention give him a little something to make all the planning and boring stuff worth it...

 

That sounds like bad logic. I don't think men would consider months of abstinence a reward.

[MissBee]

That sounds like bad logic. I don't think men would consider months of abstinence a reward.

 

Well it's not forced or imposed...so he'd have an opportunity to agree or not, which makes a huge difference.

 

Not every man is a horn dog, in my last relationship, we abstained for 3 months, granted it was in the beginning of dating, where we were dating, we kissed, touched, made out, but didn't actual have sex until 3 months in, he told me while dating "I'm not like some men, sex doesn't rule me" . We were very emotionally intimate and when we finally "consummated" it was awesome and sex was great after that delayed gratification, and frequent, then I went away to school, so it was LDR and we only saw each other about once a month and the sex was crazy intense and not at all clunky in my experience.

 

Anyway...if a couple were to do this, they would discuss it and could determine how long they wanted to do it for, a week before, 2 weeks, 1 month...it doesn't have to be months and months or 3 years as one person thought lol...plus it's not like getting a tubal ligation...one can easily say eff it, we want each other, and have sex, even after deciding that. I imagine it is a flexible thing, only done on the basis they both want to and not some staunch rule one person applies and acts like they have to shoo each other away from the "cookie jar even if they both are dying to, they build up resentments etc. THAT stance would be problematic. However, it seems more like a lighter, fun thing, which they will take in that stride and if they don't want to be strict about it can choose to relax it if they want.

[xxoo]

I don't take offense. I just would be very careful about making sure the man feels the same way about it.

 

For a lot of men, sexual connection is a major way they feel and show love. Their woman choosing abstinence (even for just a couple months) could easily be taken as love withdrawal.

[MissBee]

Anyway, my personal opinion is this, if you take two people who haven't had sex in sometime, you have a combination of delayed gratification, lust and renewed desire for one another. No one here is saying it's something couples MUST do or chastising those that don't. I actually find it rather odd that some people seem to take offense to this.

 

Me too...

 

When I first saw the thread I imagined lots of people would say they didn't do that or haven't but didn't expect people to seem appalled or offended like how could anyone do this or this is such a bad idea...

 

But it's totally a preference thing IMO, and not a right or wrong scenario and if a couple finds it to be their flavor, more power, if not, it's not law that one MUST do this.

[MissBee]

I don't take offense. I just would be very careful about making sure the man feels the same way about it.

 

For a lot of men, sexual connection is a major way they feel and show love. Their woman choosing abstinence (even for just a couple months) could easily be taken as love withdrawal.

 

I think that's the point though, and jaclyn tried to say it but people kept inserting their own opinions and ignored what she said, it would be MUTUAL, not "the woman" deciding autonomously...but like every other sexual adventure or decision, one they both agreed to and not where one partner is forcing it on the other.

[xxoo]

Well, sure, if the guy is excited about it too, that's great.

 

But I thought it was the OP's idea, and something she planned to bring up when marriage plans were in the picture. My advice would be to take care to assure that the man is really excited about it, and not just going along with it to avoid an argument or something.

 

Frankly, if we needed to abstain for months to have a passionate wedding night, I'd worry that we didn't have enough passion for the long haul.....

[miss_jaclynrae]

Anyway, my personal opinion is this, if you take two people who haven't had sex in sometime, you have a combination of delayed gratification, lust and renewed desire for one another. No one here is saying it's something couples MUST do or chastising those that don't. I actually find it rather odd that some people seem to take offense to this.

 

Well it's not forced or imposed...so he'd have an opportunity to agree or not, which makes a huge difference.

 

Not every man is a horn dog, in my last relationship, we abstained for 3 months, granted it was in the beginning of dating, where we were dating, we kissed, touched, made out, but didn't actual have sex until 3 months in, he told me while dating "I'm not like some men, sex doesn't rule me" . We were very emotionally intimate and when we finally "consummated" it was awesome and sex was great after that delayed gratification, and frequent, then I went away to school, so it was LDR and we only saw each other about once a month and the sex was crazy intense and not at all clunky in my experience.

 

Anyway...if a couple were to do this, they would discuss it and could determine how long they wanted to do it for, a week before, 2 weeks, 1 month...it doesn't have to be months and months or 3 years as one person thought lol...plus it's not like getting a tubal ligation...one can easily say eff it, we want each other, and have sex, even after deciding that. I imagine it is a flexible thing, only done on the basis they both want to and not some staunch rule one person applies and acts like they have to shoo each other away from the "cookie jar even if they both are dying to, they build up resentments etc. THAT stance would be problematic. However, it seems more like a lighter, fun thing, which they will take in that stride and if they don't want to be strict about it can choose to relax it if they want.

 

 

Thank you for this, I don't feel quite as crazy. It is frustration that people assume the worst all the time.

As if I don't know my man well enough or something, I wouldn't be marrying him if I didn't know him well enough to know how he views sex. & like you said, it wouldn't be a hitler nazi rule... if we end up getting hot and heavy and can't handle being apart then guess what? We can change our minds...

 

I don't take offense. I just would be very careful about making sure the man feels the same way about it.

 

For a lot of men, sexual connection is a major way they feel and show love. Their woman choosing abstinence (even for just a couple months) could easily be taken as love withdrawal.

 

That is the thing that is baffling to me, the fact that people here think I would do it even if he didn't feel the same way. I don't know how many times I need to say it, but we go weeks already sometimes without sex [due to my period].

 

What is up with people thinking that I would do it if there was a possibility that he would feel like I don't love him because of it?

 

I will say it AGAIN, my man doesn't depend on sex for anything, we love each other without it, and based on a lot of responses I see here I am realizing how lucky I am. Sex doesn't mean that much to ME, so finding someone with the same sex compatibility is amazing.

 

I get that for lots of couples sex is THAT important, but for us it isn't a need, it is a want.

 

 

Me too...

 

When I first saw the thread I imagined lots of people would say they didn't do that or haven't but didn't expect people to seem appalled or offended like how could anyone do this or this is such a bad idea...

 

But it's totally a preference thing IMO, and not a right or wrong scenario and if a couple finds it to be their flavor, more power, if not, it's not law that one MUST do this.

 

I think that's the point though, and jaclyn tried to say it but people kept inserting their own opinions and ignored what she said, it would be MUTUAL, not "the woman" deciding autonomously...but like every other sexual adventure or decision, one they both agreed to and not where one partner is forcing it on the other.

 

Well, sure, if the guy is excited about it too, that's great.

 

But I thought it was the OP's idea, and something she planned to bring up when marriage plans were in the picture. My advice would be to take care to assure that the man is really excited about it, and not just going along with it to avoid an argument or something.

 

Frankly, if we needed to abstain for months to have a passionate wedding night, I'd worry that we didn't have enough passion for the long haul.....

 

 

I will never understand some peoples logic.

The fact that you even think I would bring something like this up if I thought it would be an issue is insulting.

The fact that you automatically assume that abstaining is NECESSARY for a passionate wedding night it also extremely insulting. Who said that we NEEDED to do it? My point was that for US [not everyone as I am seeing] it would be a fun playful thing to do.

 

 

WTF is up with all this judgement?

[MissBee]

I think sometimes people are too quick to insert an opinion or judgment without fully reading/understanding the post and context. I am sure I have been guilty of it too...but I do try to read carefully and see what the person is saying and not answer based on my own spin of the question.

 

Maybe it's because I've thought as you have, why when you asked I intuitively "got it", whereas it was clear some others assumed all sorts of things and kept insisting on them even when you said you didn't mean that: i.e. assumptions you'd marry someone you have never slept with, that it was a "need" thus you had no passion in your relationship, that it would be a woman forcing it on a man, that if you were engaged for years you'd do it for years, that you'd never been in an LDR before and the list goes on. I was like umm whaaat?? I didn't read any of that into it...and even if I did, if you said that's not what you meant, why continue pushing those kinds of assumptions?

 

Anyway....I did take it as you're in tune with your boyfriend and so would suggest it as a thing you do as play in your relationship, just like some decide not to see each other before their wedding night, some go to strip clubs the night before (although for me I would never) or other traditions, because you know him and can gauge if he'd go for it and were simply curious if others had also done a similar thing. Nothing more, nothing less.

Edited August 2, 2013 by MissBee

[BradJacobs]

This is a horrible idea.

 

Good friend of mine and his now wife did that. She told him it was happening. He almost broke off the wedding because there was so much tension and she'd constantly throw the "it's only until the wedding" in his face. They went from the happiest couple I knew to fighting like cats and dogs within a couple of months.

 

Why fix what ain't broken?

[Els]

Thats the thing though, I HAVE gone months without seeing someone.

Even though I am using the act of seeing them as the example, it was the sex that was always super intense too.

The crave was stronger, and HIS crave was crazy insane... it just was different than when we did it almost every day.

 

Which is exactly why I think the awesome time to do it would be before our wedding night.

 

I... don't know, Jaclyn. I mean, in the end, it's entirely up to you and your potential fiance at the time, as to whether or not it'd be a good idea. If both of you are in agreement, great!

 

I'm just thinking this isn't a great reason and you'll probably end up being disappointed on the wedding night. There are solid reasons why people abstain - distance, or religion, or desire to be prepared for the possibility of raising children before having intercourse, etc. On the other hand, 'heightening sensations' isn't a good reason to abstain for a few months in my book. Opinions can certainly differ on this.

 

To answer your question, no, I haven't heard of anyone abstaining between engagement and marriage. I know plenty who are waiting for marriage fullstop, and a few born-again Christians who stopped having sex after that until they were married. But none the way you described it. Might be a new trend of sorts that I haven't really heard of.

[Silly_Girl]

Me too...

 

When I first saw the thread I imagined lots of people would say they didn't do that or haven't but didn't expect people to seem appalled or offended like how could anyone do this or this is such a bad idea...

 

 

I don't think anyone has appeared 'appalled' and certainly I haven't seen anyone find the idea 'offensive'

 

I just think quite a few people would find it a bad idea for a variety of reasons. Personally, I find it (abstaining from engagement, per the OP) odd and unnecessary, and also think it would become a negative focus in a time when being as close and intimate as ever is vital.

[Silly_Girl]

He took on extra work about 10hrs away so their time together became limited to sporadic or weekends only, during which time she was with her mother, myself and some relatives booking the venue, sampling menus, picking out cards, registering, doing bridal fittings, etc. When he'd come home he'd either be dog tired or she'd be out. It just got hectic. I'm not in her head but this is what she has related to me and he has confirmed. I can see how it could happen given that she's very high strung and a perfectionist and both wanted an awesome wedding and a memorable honeymoon getaway.

 

I believe that this happened, but that approach seems madness for me. Even with our house move, court hearings, job problems and wedding planning we regularly took time out to just 'be' together. Sometimes at the expense of other stuff. Because the most important thing out of all of it, regardless of how awesome a wedding you desire, is the relationship itself. We grew closer through the process. For me, it feels all wrong, but then I'm pretty sappy where relationships are concerned so am happy to be viewed as the opposite extreme.

[CrystalCastles]

I'm with Elswyth. I don't really see the point of the idea.

 

However, Jaclyn, if you want to practise abstinence before your wedding, that's your choice. I don't really see why some people came on here to piss on your parade. You're not murdering anyone by holding off on the sex, so its hardly a crime. I think it all depends on how long the engagement is. If a month, I don't see the problem. 3 years on the other hand...godawful long time.

[LittleTiger]

I have been in LDR and gone without for weeks and months and I've been where I have sex pretty much daily, and I have fancied the idea albeit experiencing both of those scenarios. I think sex is a personal thing, from the kind, to frequency, to what gets people off and the degree of importance in their relationship. There is no right or wrong in this scenario, but whether it is right for that couple or not. One can state it's not their preference without making it seem like the OP is doing something wrong or just "needs more understanding", as it is certainly about preference, and that particular couple's needs versus a universal case of all healthy couples have to have sex everyday or if they don't their relationship will naturally go down the drain.

 

Where did I even imply that the OP was 'doing something wrong'?

 

I said I wouldn't do it - because sex for me and my guy is an important way for us to bond emotionally and we've already been forced to abstain for much too long. We are also engaged, so I'm speaking in the present tense rather than some imaginary scenario in the future.

 

I expressed an opinion that the OP might change her mind after a period of being in an LDR where going without sex for long periods is not a choice. I'm pretty sure that would change most people's opinions on voluntary celibacy but, obviously, I could be wrong. I hadn't picked up, from her previous posts, that she'd already experienced an LDR in the past.

 

I also said that 'life is too short'. Based on the fact that, in the past 6 months, my ex- husband died suddenly of a heart attack, one of my guy's best friends died suddenly from cancer, and I became very ill myself, I wouldn't waste one single second of my life by 'giving up' something I love, which is good for me both mentally and physically, in the hopes of increased gratification at some point in the future!

 

You, and others, might see that as an extreme and depressing way of looking at this topic, but we all base our responses on our personal experiences and, like it not, 'more understanding' on any subject does alter perspective.

 

As far as I'm concerned the OP can do whatever she chooses with her sex life 'if' she gets engaged and I don't think anybody here has said anything different.

[LittleTiger]

Me too...

 

When I first saw the thread I imagined lots of people would say they didn't do that or haven't but didn't expect people to seem appalled or offended like how could anyone do this or this is such a bad idea...

 

But it's totally a preference thing IMO, and not a right or wrong scenario and if a couple finds it to be their flavor, more power, if not, it's not law that one MUST do this.

 

I've read the whole thread and I haven't seen a single post that suggests anyone is appalled or offended by the OPs idea.

 

It's a discussion thread, just like every other one on LS so people are going to give their opinions and, since 'abstaining from sex' is an emotive topic for many people, there are going to be some strong opinions.

 

Most people apparently wouldn't abstain but nobody has said that the OP shouldn't. It's her life and her choice.