Those who discuss past transgressions

[Archaea]

My experience, anecdotal as it may be, involves friends, family, and self, as well as in church positions, and includes legal consultations.

I never said, if asked, one should lie.

I don't believe that. If asked by a spouse or potential spouse, one should be honest.

However, limited to my experience, those that ask, do so for less than honorable reasons. Upon further reflection, if a female asked, I would answer honestly and dismiss her as a potential mate. The vast majority of my experience is, if somebody asks about that stuff, then they probably will use it against you. Women get special treatment in that department.

For amusment, we might start a double standards discussion.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by homeboy

I find it fascinating that this is such a polarizing issue.

My wife has never asked me anything about my premarital sex life. And I have never asked her. Never has been an issue either way.

In the interest of full disclosure, I need to mention something. It very well could be that the reason neither one of us has asked about pre-marital experiences is due to the dismal, awkward, almost laughable performance on our wedding night. If either of us were fooling around prior to marriage, we certainly didn't do it enough to get very good at it.

[realtall]

Originally Posted by SteelBlue

I really don't understand why somebody who has "taken care of" that problem would be so worried about disclosing it to the future spouse. The argument so far has been that there is no legitimate reason for her to want to know. I find that argument ridiculous.

Perhaps I am not expressing myself quite right. It is not merely a 'need to know' thing, its that dredging up something that is in the past(sometimes far in the past) that may have been quite painful and an ordeal to take care of and is now deemed 'need to know' by a future spouse? #1 - does it benefit the one who is getting his past rifled through? #2 - Does it benefit the one who is doing the rifling? Now your contention is that it doesn't matter. I still stand by my assertion that it depends. All the little stuff done as a teen and even as an adult is out the window, imo. Use your imagination to figure out what 'little' means. But in the interest of full disclosure it should all be listed out. Itemized and sorted by date. We are talking about full disclosure here aren't we(is it me or is this starting to sound like a trial)? At the same time there are certain things that should be carefuly considered and some that should be automatic(ly disclosed) and I outlined them in my earlier post. As far as fornication goes(which I think is our principal hangup here) this is what I think: If one or both of the parties involved has been promiscous(promiscous=repeated sex) in the past this fact needs to be disclosed but it is not necessary to itemize each person and each event. Generally, the other party would probably already know about this persons past one way or another but that's neither here nor there. If a blood test needs to be taken to confirm that the offending party is a-ok(std free) than so be it. Now, as far as a single occurance goes, that is where the problem of disclosure looms the biggest, imo. Its where a surprise is most likely to occur. For this, I don't have a good answer. You say there there should be full disclosure(also the name of a Michael Douglas-Demi Moore movie. Demi was so hot in that one. But I digress.) in all instances. Rather than coming down hard on this one I will just offer this possiblity: The sweet girl comes clean on a past discretion. The handsome guy says that 'that's ok, it makes no difference, you've taken care of it, etc.' She is relieved because she was sure that this was going to be a problem and is feeling great that its all going to be ok. But secretly he can't stop thinking about it. They get married anyways. Its always in the back of his mind, though. Occasionaly he brings it up and wants a sufficient explanation but she doesn't have one that will put it to rest. He starts to loath her. *bad ending here*

Do you think that this is so farfetched?

But hey, he needed to know.

Originally Posted by SteelBlue

I totally disagree. The man has the exact same right to any information that he feels is important in making his decision.

We actually agree about this one. It just looked to me that this thread was going one way.

[realtall]

My own experience, fwiw:


I don't have any. Frankly, it never occured to me to ask. And she never asked me.

[Archaea]

Isn't this a strange thread?

In any other industrialized society, dudes would be saying, I wouldn't want to marry a virgin, remember how lousy the sex was.

We are a weird sort. We worry about disclosing something which the remainder of contemporary society considers a right of passage at fourteen or fifteen.

For reasons which are irrelevant here and not as the result of my inquiry, a client was discussing her past more than I wanted. She disclosed that she had waited until she was seventeen, the last of her classmates. Apparently after losing it, she worked hard to catch up with her classmates.

Here's a question.

How many of your colleagues have committed adultery. In my neck of the woods, it's about fifty percent. Among active LDS, it's probably 10 to 20 percent, an abomination, but lower than most other couples.

[SteelBlue]

Originally Posted by realtall

#1 - does it benefit the one who is getting his past rifled through? #2 - Does it benefit the one who is doing the rifling? Now your contention is that it doesn't matter.

My contention is that it's up to her what is important for her to know. Now, what that says about her to you is up to you.

Originally Posted by realtall

All the little stuff done as a teen and even as an adult is out the window, imo. Use your imagination to figure out what 'little' means. But in the interest of full disclosure it should all be listed out. Itemized and sorted by date. We are talking about full disclosure here aren't we(is it me or is this starting to sound like a trial)?

What I've attempted to convey all along is that she should be able to ask anything she wants to ask and get an honest answer. I've never said one is required to voluntarily disclose past sins. If she wants to know every "little" thing then, as others have said here, you might begin to question her motives. If she thinks she's going to find a guy that didn't spend a little "extra time" in the bathroom somewhere between the ages of 5 and 18 then she may as well be looking for the Holy Grail.

Originally Posted by realtall

Now, as far as a single occurance goes, that is where the problem of disclosure looms the biggest, imo. Its where a surprise is most likely to occur. For this, I don't have a good answer. You say there there should be full disclosure(also the name of a Michael Douglas-Demi Moore movie. Demi was so hot in that one. But I digress.) in all instances.

I say there should be an honest answer to any of her questions. The main one is likely to be something along the lines of "have you ever had sex before"? There is no legitimate opportunity to lie at that point. Rather than revealing anything you could say "that's none of your business" or "there's nothing I've done in the past that I haven't taken care of", or "what is your motivation for wanting to know?" That may be enough for some. But if your true answer is "yes", then "no" is never a legitimate answer.

Originally Posted by realtall

Rather than coming down hard on this one I will just offer this possiblity: The sweet girl comes clean on a past discretion. The handsome guy says that 'that's ok, it makes no difference, you've taken care of it, etc.' She is relieved because she was sure that this was going to be a problem and is feeling great that its all going to be ok. But secretly he can't stop thinking about it. They get married anyways. Its always in the back of his mind, though. Occasionaly he brings it up and wants a sufficient explanation but she doesn't have one that will put it to rest. He starts to loath her. *bad ending here*

That's "handsome guy's" problem. He's completely in the wrong at that point. She was honest and he chose to go forward. Sounds like a case where his motivation for knowing wasn't legitimate in the first place. As IlPadrino mentioned a few pages back, don't ask any questions that you don't want to know the answer to.

[realtall]

Originally Posted by SteelBlue

What I've attempted to convey all along is that she should be able to ask anything she wants to ask and get an honest answer. I've never said one is required to voluntarily disclose past sins. If she wants to know every "little" thing then, as others have said here, you might begin to question her motives. If she thinks she's going to find a guy that didn't spend a little "extra time" in the bathroom somewhere between the ages of 5 and 18 then she may as well be looking for the Holy Grail.

Are we arguing about this? It sounds like we agree.

Originally Posted by SteelBlue

I say there should be an honest answer to any of her questions. The main one is likely to be something along the lines of "have you ever had sex before"? There is no legitimate opportunity to lie at that point. Rather than revealing anything you could say "that's none of your business" or "there's nothing I've done in the past that I haven't taken care of", or "what is your motivation for wanting to know?" That may be enough for some. But if your true answer is "yes", then "no" is never a legitimate answer.

I have never advocating lying. And I have never advocated being rude. I believe that I've already addresed all of this.

Originally Posted by SteelBlue

That's "handsome guy's" problem. He's completely in the wrong at that point. She was honest and he chose to go forward. Sounds like a case where his motivation for knowing wasn't legitimate in the first place. As IlPadrino mentioned a few pages back, don't ask any questions that you don't want to know the answer to.

Wrong. Now its both of their problem.

It is an interesting point about the motivation to know, though. You would hope that the person that you chose to marry wouldn't be that way but that's not always how it works out.

[ute4ever]

Originally Posted by Archaea

How many of your colleagues have committed adultery. In my neck of the woods, it's about fifty percent. Among active LDS, it's probably 10 to 20 percent, an abomination, but lower than most other couples.

I can't speak for adultery per se, but about three years ago my singles ward bishop told me it was his observation that about 25% of the ward was non-virgin.

[Robin]

Don't ask, don't tell?