[Redbook1:30-35][19680425:0915]{Pre-marital Sexual
Intercourse}[25th April 1968][Age 16]
9.15a.m.
I am
writing this in the first study period morning.
I had an idea this morning which I wanted to get down as quickly as
possible lest I forget it, so I brought the book into school with me -- I only
hope nobody sees it lying around and wants to look at it, because I shall have
to say "no" and explain my negative.
The
question is premarital sexual intercourse, about which there was so much
controversy a short time ago. Let me say
at once that I am not trying to dictate to anybody the principles by
which they should work -- I'm only trying to clarify my own thoughts on the
subject (This is how all the good, influential sermons begin).
There are
four courses open to "the young unmarried". He/She may decide not to sleep with anyone
till marriage, or to sleep only with the person he/she intends to marry, or to
sleep only with people with whom he/she is in love, or to sleep with anyone who
takes his/her fancy.
Sleeping
with anyone who takes one's fancy is, I think, rather a stupid, and even
suicidal (in that it kills the source of enjoyment) course to take. The experience of having sexual intercourse
with someone has been described to me as the most beautiful thing on earth --
but it can be divided like anything else.
Men who are simply looking for sexual excitement and feeling can get
that perfectly well from masturbation.
There is still some guilty feeling about masturbation, but I think it is
misplaced; if there is no God, then there is nothing to stop one's use of
"nature’s" own "gift" to men, but if there is a God, then I
don't think he would have provided a hand to fit a phallus so exactly had he
not meant to use it. I am sure that the
ability to masturbate serves a good purpose -- by channelling off man's
energies and desires into harmless and easy activities, it serves to protect
the more beautiful and perhaps sacred aspect of sex -- sexual intercourse --
safe from the contempt that is bred by familiarity. In other words, I would rather satisfy myself
frequently by masturbation then by sexual intercourse -- the former can be
"devalued" much less than the latter, as the former is much less of a
spiritual experience than the latter. It
is a proven fact (I think) that men who sleep with women a lot generally grow
tired of it quite quickly, but go on with it because, very often, they cannot
think of anything else to do. (Oddly
enough, this doesn't always seem to apply to married couples -- perhaps it
doesn't apply when both parties are in love with each other). I understand that for women the problem is
different, since they don't suffer from the same lasts as men. But if they do over-use their right to sleep
with men, the same results would, I think, occur.
The other
extreme course is not to sleep with anyone until one's marriage, and then
(presumably) only with one's husband/wife. I think that this, too, is unwise, especially
for men. Men often fall in love with a
woman because she is mysterious -- there is something they want. But they often find that once they've got it
-- i.e. slept with the girl -- they don't want it any more. If they discover this during engagement then
they can still break it off, but if they only discover after marriage it is
generally too late without a divorce, which I abhor for reasons I shall give
later. Whether the problem is the same
for women I don't know, but I imagine it is.
The idea of
having sexual intercourse only with those one intends to marry is praiseworthy,
but it seems a pity if one loves someone but knows one cannot marry them or if
one has not discussed it yet -- though the former case is rare, the latter is
common -- one may love someone, but only decide if one wants to live with
him/her after having had sexual intercourse with him/her. It is also very important not to feel bound
to marry someone after having had sexual intercourse with him/her.
Therefore,
I think that it is best to have sexual intercourse with people one loves very
much, to find out whether one would like to live with him/her. It is much better to find out before marriage
-- even before engagement. Males should
use masturbation for physical sexual thrills, and reserve sexual intercourse
for a more spiritual type of love.
This all
sounds fine in theory, but in practice, of course, there are many
obstacles. For one thing, the social
prejudices of this age, though they can be worn away in time, will not at
present look favourably on man and woman living together before marriage to
find out whether they are suited to each other.
Secondly, if social prejudices were got rid of there would be a lot of
less intelligent people who would take advantage of "the new
immorality" to do exactly what I discouraged earlier -- using the other
sex as sex-machines. This would be
against their own interests, as I have pointed out above, but also against the
interest of everyone else in that the sexual licence would continue after
marriage. The whole point of relaxed
controls before marriage is to increase the sanctity of marriage itself. Many of the broken marriages of today are
due, I feel sure, to overhasty marriages in the first passion of a temporary
love. If couples can have the
opportunity to find out all there is to know about each other before marrying,
and to experiment with the married state before marriage, I am certain there
would be fewer broken homes, fewer divorces, and fewer maladjusted
children. This is why divorce is
so terrible; it is sad to hear supposedly loving couples quarrelling, but it is
tragic to see their children deteriorating as their family life deteriorates
around them.
These, then,
are the measures I hope to see taken -- not by legislation, but by the people
as a whole. Firstly, social prejudice
should clamp down on the kind of person who uses the opposite sex as
sex-machines, but should be sympathetic with couples (who are obviously hoping
to marry) living together to find out whether marriage will work for them. Secondly, contraceptives should be made
easily available, on the National Health if necessary, to stop the flow of
illegitimate births, and sex education (both biological and sociological)
should be given to unmixed classes of pupils in adolescence (they must
be unmixed so that both get the idea that their sexual company must be given
away with discrimination and not carelessly).
Thirdly, the sacrosanct image of the marriage and the family --
especially the family -- must be built up by the Church and other suitable mass
communications systems. Divorces should
remain easy to get, but should be looked on as a kind of stigma.
In this
way, by encouraging pre-marital sex within limits, I hope we shall discourage
the various marital complications -- such as adultery, divorce, wife swapping,
etc. -- which have such a bad effect on children. Wife swapping may indeed be a good way to
save a marriage from collapse, but marriages really should not be entered upon
if such results are likely to occur.
It really
is time that someone did a proper survey on all the things that go to make up a
marriage -- length of engagement, length of time during which couples knew each
other before marriage, whether there was premarital intercourse, number of
children, and so on -- and related these factors to the success of the
marriage. Obviously such a task will be
fraught with complications, but I think the interest of the results would well
repay the trouble taken in obtaining them.
I went down
to the bank today and got a New Tenpence piece and a new Five Pence piece. They are already showing signs of wear on
their faces if one holds them up to artificial light. I couldn't get all I wanted because the bank
(Barclay’s) had orders not to get rid of them too quickly, apparently. I am desperately saving up all the old coins
I can -- I want to try and get a complete set of all coins from 1900 if I can.
[PostedBlogger10092012]
