Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2026 Poal.co

238

Your 16 year old son finds himself a "girlfriend", do you go out of your way to make sure that they're always supervised, never alone, etc. Or do you let it slip that you're going to be going on an overnight outing with his mother, and the house will be free for the night. He can have friends over as long as they're responsible and clean up after themselves.

On the one hand, sex is a very risky activity, and teenagers can be very untrustworthy, and frankly stupid. But if he gets the experience over with while still at school, it won't be such a big deal later, and the more sexual partners he has, the more comfortable he will be in his dating life later. He won't mary the first girl that lets him see her naked, and can think objectively about a partner, rather than just with his dick.

If he doesn't have that opportunity early, he may turn out to be an "incel", virgin, weird, etc. Socially inept or highly anxious around women... I think we all know what happens to young men that, despite trying never get laid.

On the other hand, knocking up a girl at 16 is pretty much life over, and no girl who can sneak out without their parents kicking up a huge stink is marriage material. I mean, I wouldn't let my daughter go spend a night at her boyfriend's place.

Also, if it gets too serious, it can interfere with his education. I've seen first hand how my school mate absolutely flunked his last year because he was spending too much time with (and worrying about) his girlfriend who dumped him soon after graduation. Got a job doing data entry, lives with a disabled single mother, they live on her welfare and child support payments, it's not pretty.

Your 16 year old son finds himself a "girlfriend", do you go out of your way to make sure that they're always supervised, never alone, etc. Or do you let it slip that you're going to be going on an overnight outing with his mother, and the house will be free for the night. He can have friends over as long as they're responsible and clean up after themselves. On the one hand, sex is a very risky activity, and teenagers can be very untrustworthy, and frankly stupid. But if he gets the experience over with while still at school, it won't be such a big deal later, and the more sexual partners he has, the more comfortable he will be in his dating life later. He won't mary the first girl that lets him see her naked, and can think objectively about a partner, rather than just with his dick. If he doesn't have that opportunity early, he may turn out to be an "incel", virgin, weird, etc. Socially inept or highly anxious around women... I think we all know what happens to young men that, despite trying never get laid. On the other hand, knocking up a girl at 16 is pretty much life over, and no girl who can sneak out without their parents kicking up a huge stink is marriage material. I mean, I wouldn't let my daughter go spend a night at her boyfriend's place. Also, if it gets too serious, it can interfere with his education. I've seen first hand how my school mate absolutely flunked his last year because he was spending too much time with (and worrying about) his girlfriend who dumped him soon after graduation. Got a job doing data entry, lives with a disabled single mother, they live on her welfare and child support payments, it's not pretty.

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.
Click here to see all the comments (34).
[–] • 0 pt

Study's .

I would very much appreciate if you could repay the same respect back towards me, that I have shown unto you, and provide a source or link to a study, paper, or even article, that asserts your claim. I assume you will have much less trouble in finding these studies than I.

[–] • 0 pt

When I have time I'll look for them. I know there has been some research done in it. I know becasue I wanted to write a paper in college to support the argument living together before marridge was overall better for marriages long term and I could find nothing supporting this. In fact I found the opposite. My teacher was disappointed when I changed my argument but how could I argue a statement I could find not proof on?

[–] • 0 pt

You're conflating the two arguments.

I'm asking for: multiple sex partners for men does effect men negatively in marriage too.

Not: living together increases divorce risk

As far as I'm aware, there are NO studies that show an increased risk for divorce for men with more premarital sexual partners. Infact, here is proof of the opposite: http://before-i-do.org/, expand the section titled "appendix", emphasis mine.

Moderation Analyses Gender. Only two of the findings were moderated significantly by gender, controlling for demographic variables. Having a child or children from prior relationship was negatively associated with marital quality for women (b = -1.72), not for men (b = .055). Additionally, more sexual partners before marriage were negatively associated with marital quality for women (b = -.061), not for men (b = -.004).

Unless you can provide a source proving the opposite, or provide a credible argument against. I think you may have to retract your original claim that more sexual partners for men increases divorce risk.

[–] • 0 pt

Your source shows it right there,

> Men and women who only slept with their (future) spouse prior to marriage reported higher marital quality than those who had other sexual partners as well.>>

I know I saw it somewhere although I'm sure it will take me a while to find and honestly I don't have a lot of spare time but when I do find it I'll post it. Pair bonding is effected by the amount of partners you have more so in women but to a lesser degree in men as well. If you have a hard time pair bonding or that would increase your risk of divorce.