"would you reject a guy who is still virgin as a potent

Post Reply New Topic

Just for Uprising

Edit:
intentionally left open ended (exactly as written by Uprising) to allow for more than heterosexual. Apologies for not making it generic enough for all sexual preferences in both sexual spectrums.

Last edited by FlanMaster on 11 Aug 2013, 12:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.

This thread is useless, because what they claim to do usually has nothing to do what they really go after or what they do for real.

Here, I have neglected all replies already .

Shouldn't this be in the Womyn's Coven... sorry, forum?

Under UK law virginity is defined in terms of specifically has a person had intercourse or not.
And, intercourse is defined as being a mechanical process whereby a man inserts their penis into a vagina and thrusts back and forth for at least three minutes.
Neither person has to orgasm, nobody has to learn anything meaningful from the activity, and nobody has to even enjoy the activity for it to be defined as intercourse.
Some people (of both genders) lose their virginity by being raped.

Many gay people shag each others' brains out frequently, but are still virgins according to the widely held traditional definition of the term.

Do many people really care that much about whether a person has (or has not) lost their virginity, when it's presently defined in such a meaningless way ?

I wonder....

Whyever should it be ?

Every gay (or gay curious) man should have every right to see the topic and cast their vote I reckon !

Yes, I would.

Have done just that, so the disservice is yours.

WAIT A MINUTE
WAIT
WAIT A SECOND
WAIT

Wait

Does this mean that if the guy can't last three minutes, he's legally a virgin in the UK?

HAHHAHAHAHAHAAHAHHAHAHAHA

the 13 second virgin.

haaahahaha... that's a good point.

I guess that he would be, when you put it like that.

I've just looked it up, and seemingly the guy has to be able to go at it for "four or five" minutes for it to be classifiable as intercourse (thus merit those involved having loss of virginity status)...
Furthermore (under English law, but I don't know about Irish or Scottish law) a marriage can actually be annulled if the guy hasnt done that (!) , on the basis that according to the law the marriage 'hasn't been consummated' because the couple "have not had intercourse at least once".

... so I guess that in that case, both the guy and the woman would both still be virgins....

I used to know a guy who would have been a 30-second virgin.

I never did anything physical with him or anything like that, but I know about it because he used to go out with the loud-mouthed town bike
While they were going out, she would blabber on to her female friends (and anybody else within earshot, which included me) about what a total dead loss she felt that he was, because the longest he had ever lasted before having an orgasm was 30 seconds.

Because he never lasted very long, she would try to have as much sex with him as possible.... often going at it several times a day !

But yup according to the law, he's still totally a virgin.

LOL !

one of the meds the neurologist wanted to put me on had a side effect of not being able to "finish". I suppose I should ask him which medication that was and post it so everyone has a chance to legally make sure their marraiges can't be annulled for being too "tightly wound".

I can hear the engaged couples conversation now: " we have to wait 6 weeks honey so the side effects can fully manifest and I can legally consumate our marriage with 5 minutes worth of humpage. I don't want to be a 13 second virgin for the rest of my life."

but that leads to the quesion: what about the 13 second female? who is also quick to complete? isn't it cruel to expect her to suffer 3 to 5 minutes if her physical response system doesn't provide the proper protection against friction? (dries out after done,not all are comfortable with artificial lubricants).

Someone should SUE the uk parliament for discrimination against and cruelty to women.

Brits...

Females can experience multiple orgasms, so they're not dead after just one--just more lubricated!
But for most, it takes a lot longer than 13 seconds to have an orgasm...unless they have Restless Genital Syndrome. I kind of REALLY want that. People with that syndrome can have up to 100 orgasms a minute--wouldn't that be awesome?

HAHHAHA, this is funny to me, though. I'm just...thinking about my 'virgins'

I have a cousin who has confessed to needing lubricant because she is too fast, and a collegue who felt, for some reason, that I was a good confidant (I never spoke much when she got on these conversations). one time when I was being babysat while my mother stayed with my brother at surgery the woman was in her bedroom yelling at her husband for being stupid and expecting her to be able to "stay all wet and greasy" while he took forever to finish. They hadn't been in the room more than 3 minutes according to the clock (I was waiting on supper, so I kept tabs). That stuck with me because I thought it was a rather strange conversation, until I realized years later what she was referring to. Her daughter just told me to ignore them, that they reguarly argued about being greasy.

Multiple orgasms are like anything else, not all women can or has experienced them.

an unscientific study suggests that many women don't experience any orgasm:

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/Reproducti ... id=8485289, which brings about the point that, even if it's unscientific, it is still based on the fact that some women don't

We better be careful that this thread doesn't start earning the need to be moved to adult forum

Any others on here saying "yes"?