CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
It's not 1953 anymore, where everyone still buys into the whole virgin white milieu. You wear white because you think it's the color that looks best for your wedding. If you're getting married without taking your partner for a test drive at least a few dozen times, you're insane. This is the person you're going to spend the rest of your life with. What if he or she is a lousy lay. You're damning yourself to a life of bad sex and you don't even know it. insanity!
It does'nt matter this is after all the 21st Century, if you want to wear White wear White as long as you have'nt lied to the person you are marrying it does'nt matter
I think the woman should wear whatever color she wants. It's her wedding, and the man's as well, and if they want her to wear white then they should be able to. Hardly anyone who gets married is a virgin still, but it's still traditional to wear white.
To be frank , there are not much who still virgin until the day of wedding , I personally and the public would think so , I assumed . Virginity is the runner-up in comparison to the love and bond between the two , right ? So , what's the big deal to heed much about one's virginity and wearing pure white during the vivacious day ....huh ?
It depends on who knows. If no one knows, except the guy that's out of the picture and he can be counted on to keep his big, fat, mouth shut, then go right ahead and wear white.
If your Dad doesn't know and you're his little angel and you don't want to destroy his world image of you, and your old boyfriend cannot be counted on to keep his big, fat, mouth shut, then..., take a chance, wear white and hope for the best.
If everyone knows, then wear something that is as many shades off-white as the number of guys you have bedded. So, for example, if you did the football team..., you my end up wearing something close to black..., maybe a dark gray.
If it was only anal sex..., then you may want to consider a brownish color.
If it was only oral sex, then a few stains on the dress should be in order.
Crap!!! That escalated fast ;)
What the f*ck do I know, why are you even asking ;)
While I agree You shouldn't wear pure white on your wedding day if you aren't a virgin lying about it is wrong. To me if there was any sexual act I did I wouldn't wear pure white. I love asking questions ;) especially ones people never thought to think about.
Of course. The whole "Pure soul symbolism" thing is not even relevant anymore. I'm not saying that I believe in losing your virginity before marriage, I'm just saying that doing so is not a justifiable reason to wear an ugly dress on your own wedding.
"for it contains no color. It only absorbs light."
So....you actually mean it contains all colors? White contains no colors because it reflects all colors. Black contains all colors because it absorbs all colors. If you took Red, Blue, Green, and Yellow paint, and mixed them together, you would get white?????? Of course not, you'd get black.
What you are thinking of is light in terms of production, not reflection. There's a difference, but not to worry. I've personally made this same mistake myself tons of times. ;)
So, technically, yes; white is the most pure color because it contains absolutely no colors at all.
I don't think it's right to wear white. It's like lying or being ashamed of yourself, you have to wear white to placate societal expectations. If you aren't a virgin, own it. Things in my opinion that disqualify White as an option are, Not being a Virgin, Being Married before, having kids with or without marriage. And the biggest reason, who actually looks good in white anyways?
If you've been married before and have kids, wearing white makes you look foolish, because, well you have kids... I am all for Brides wearing colorful gowns, blush, peach, pinks, taupe, beige, hues of blues. Whatever, but not white. Leave that for virgins, the beginners of life. IF you've lived a little or a lot, wear those life experiences, don't hide them. It's like women who are ashamed of grey hair, you've earn every one of those hairs, they are to be cherished as something you went through and came out the other side of stronger. Wearing white when you don't qualify is a self harming lie, why would you do that to yourself and your partner and your new life together? Incorporate white into your dress, but it shouldn't be solid white.
We all know that is supposed to represent the purity of the bride so 99% of women out there should be honest and wear something else. You made your choices in life so be honest with yourself.
How wonderfully sexist of you. Not only do you assume to know the private sexual choices of the entire female population, but you support a tradition that attempts to objectify and shame women for their personal sex life without any regard to what the groom has done/not done.
There's no shame in it, most people (in western society) don't wait until marriage. If a bride wears white on her wedding day when she's not a virgin everyone (especially the groom) will think "shenanigans", lol.
I'm sure if there was a similar tradition for the groom he would display his loss of virginity without issue (it would almost be a badge of honor, lol). Only women have a problem with it; many like to be viewed as perfect little Angels even when the complete opposite is true.
The reason the white dress became associated in the first place with virginity for women was an attempt to control their personal sexual lives and to stigmatize and shame those who did not conform to that standard. There is absolutely no reason whatsoever that a bride should have to broadcast their personal sexual choices to everyone at the wedding ceremony. That "only women have a problem with it" has everything to do with social expectations and pressures to conform to the "angelic" image. Men often receive the opposite pressures, but even so there has never been an expectation that they broadcast their personal sexual choices to everyone at their wedding. It is a flat out double standard and I maintain my earlier statement in full.
Hypothetically, if under the premise that society did not encourage people to have morals:
If you were a virgin (hold your laughter please), would you be ashamed to admit that fact to family, close friends or your potential spouse?
Conversely, would you be ashamed to admit that you were sexually promiscuous to that same group of peers?
People naturally have a moral compass, it's obvious that if society holds people to a certain standard it's because there is general consensus that it is the right way to behave. It's easy and usually indulgent to act immorally when no one will find out or when there are no adverse consequences but if your immorality were to become public or the consequences were certain people would not act immorally less they truly lacked a conscience or self control.
Your potential spouse would not appreciate knowing that you got gang banged by the football team as the image would likely haunt him. Your character would constantly be in question, his trust and respect for you would be greatly diminished. And that goes both ways, a woman would experience equal discomfort if she were to learn her husband was a man whore.
To begin with, I dispute your hypothetical assertion. The lack of a universal morality in practice and the strong correlation of cultural groups with distinct moralities is strongly indicative that morality is a socialized factor, and where it is not so I would argue that it derives from biological aspects of human nature.
Humoring your hypothesis however I still disagree. For me personally, I do not give a damn what anyone thinks about my personal sex life. What bothers me is that people think it is any of their business to begin with, or that they have some moral high-ground from which to judge me or others. You argue that society adopting a moral standard through general consensus makes it correct. However, society used to find slavery to be morally acceptable and furthermore when the morality regarding the sexual lives of women was determined it was done by men and applied to women (and cutting out half the population is hardly a consensus). The simple fact that not all people (and I would even argue a majority) do not consider it immoral to have premarital sex indicates that this is not an absolute or dominant moral standard anyways.
Finally, your sexism is showing. Your association of rape with victim blaming is atrocious and illogical; if someone is forced to have sex then that does not reflect on their character in any way but rather upon the character of those who committed the assault. If I discovered my partner had been raped I would be supportive. And if I learned that my partner had had a previous partner I could care less as long I had no reason to suspect that they were going to have another partner whilst we were together (and for that matter, some people could care less about that too).
I don't think he meant "rape" when he said "gang bang." Technically "gang bang" doesn't actually entail rape, and is in fact the most specific way to refer to one individual having sex with lots of individuals. Saying the girl and the football team had an orgy would imply the football team spent as much time having sex with one another as with her. Saying the football team gang banged the girl means they all had sex with her, and just her, not each other. A gang rape would mean lots of men forcing sex with her, and just her. An orgy rape is... well... I don't know. Your guess is as good as mine.
I find the term and the way it was used to still be problematic, but I think it is a matter of secondary importance to the immediate debate question. If it was not the intent of the poster, then I rescind the comment "your sexism is showing" as it was premised upon my misunderstanding.
At any rate, I could honestly care less about the semantic distinction. It does not change the crux of my argument which is that what another person chooses to do in their personal sex life is not the business of an entire gathering of people at their wedding and that the tradition of shaming women using the wedding gown is sexist. What an individual chose to do sexually is between them and their partner alone, and truly does not concern anyone else. If the other partner knows their partners history and is fine with it (which some people honestly are) then why should it matter?
Perhaps I should have started my last post with: "I agree with what you're trying to say, but..."
I do agree with you. You were just misinformed about the gang bang thing. And it is a recognized sexual term. What else are you supposed to call it when a gang of people all bang one person?
To build on your point, however, I had a history as a bit of a man-slut, and I've got more notches on my bedpost than I care to recall. My current and very loving girlfriend knows and accepts this. Her sexual history is less promiscuous, but she has slept with a few people I'm still good friends with. Her current boyfriend, me, knows and accepts this. It's never been an issue. We have what you'd call a "good relationship."
Of course, I also could have realized it was support post and not an argument too. The problem you get when you combine a tired mind with the internet. ;)
Anyways, I agree I was misinformed on the "gang bang" term and thanks for clarifying it of course. I do though still think that the term has rather strong connotations that are quite negative and objectifying towards women while also entrenching stereotyped conceptions of masculinity upon men. Then again, perhaps I am objecting to the social phenomenon as much as the term itself... another debate/discussion for another thread I suppose.
On a closing note, so glad to hear that you and your girlfriend are doing well together, and all the best to you both! :)
