Murphy, Daniel P.

English

epublications@Marquette

The Linacre QuarterlyVolume 35 | Number 2 Article 6May 1968The "Amoral" Approach to Sex Counselling ofCollegiansDaniel P. MurphyFollow this and additional works at: http://epublications.marquette.edu/lnqRecommended CitationMurphy, Daniel P. (1968) "The "Amoral" Approach to Sex Counselling of Collegians," The Linacre Quarterly: Vol. 35 : No. 2 , Article 6.Available at: http://epublications.marquette.edu/lnq/vol35/iss2/6The ''Amoral'' Approach to Sex Counselling of Collegians Daniel P. Murphy, M.A. The academic psychologist in a Cat h o lie university is frequently consulted in sexual rna tters by a unique group of students, those seeking guidelines for premarital sexual behavior with some basis other than that of Christian morality. Some of these students are "instant intellectuals," rebelling against the pablum of Kelley's Modern Youth and Chastity, or any traditional view. A few are seeking liberal advice from anyone who will help them justify present sexual behavior. Others are merely disillusioned with years of dogmatic indoctrination. The majority of these students, however, demonstrate gunuine concern for the rights of others, and wish to discuss and examine alternatives intellectually rather than emotionally. They are the antithesis of the fun-seeking, free-loving, self indulgent individual so often pictured in this situation. They are attempting to resolve a co mplicated issue in a m~ture, intelligent manner. Why. do young people seek non-moral reasons for chastity? While the evidence from sociological and psychological investigations indicate that premarital coital rates have experienced little change in the past few decades, a consolidation and acceptance of sexual attitudes has been occurring. 1 1 The significant change has been the increased acceptance of premarital sexual 104 intercourse, rather than the incr ied performance. Thus, for our ) mg people, guilt for sexual activitie. .s a less frequent and less il se reaction.1 0 While guilt was a suff znt deterrent for our parents,, the yot ' of today must have other guidelin to supplement the spiritual ones h; :.led ~own by church and family. A brief example will demon rate one approach to such sexual pro ·' ems which has been successfully emp yed by this writer. An attempt is mo c to apply psychological, sociologica and statistical considerations to the problem (as well as expen 1tial evidence.) Let us examine one . the most frequently asked question~ one which appears deceptively simple ·'We love each other so much th" we actually feel married, and pos1 .vely will be married when the sitt tion permits it. Why should we wait ~·or a ceremony to complete our love?' We always look at the positiv(J side of the behavior first for st>veral reasons. The students anticipate a negative reaction and when the mitial statements indicate that the counselor recognizes advantages as well as disadvantages to premarital coitus , the atmosphere is more conducive to (Mr. Murphy is an Instructor in Psychology, Creighton University, Omaha, Nebraska.) Linacre Quarterly J genuine dialogue. Furthermore, the subject tends to be more relaxed and has confidence that the counselor is willing to look at both sides of the question. On this positive side, the male achieves immediate sexual satisfaction with the woman he loves. He may realize more thart ever before the depth of her love for him. The woman may feel a sense of fulfillment as a woman in being physically desired by her man. We know that a woman's sexual -response must be both psychological as emotional, not just physiCally mechanical. The giving of her body to the man of her choice is an important part of her fulfillment. She may feel more secure in as much as intercourse has -committed them even more deeply. They may, in fact, find that their love has deepened through sexual expression before marriage. The evidence indicates, however, that for every possible advantage to premarital intercourse .in our society, there exists many disadvantages. We shall examine only a few. First, although attitudes towards premarital coitus have changed in the general population, virginity is still desirable. Few things swell the masculine ego as the knowledge that his bride has held him special above all others. In fact, evidence has shown that the majority of women who had premarital coitus which they did not regret do not want their daughters to experience intercourse before marriage. 2 While Kinsey indicated that half the college population experienced premarital intercourse, one must - consider the norm group from which the estimate was obtained. A more recent estimate has been made that only ~bout 20% of today's college girls are not virgins. 8 I usually mention that it is surprising how many men who claim that virginity is not important still insist on asking their fiancee about her chastity. May, 1968 The responses elicited by the students has reassured me that this ' is a frequent occurrence. Premarital coitus frequently acts to destroy the thing it was intenaed to cement, the intimate relationship between two people. Many young couples have a distorted impression of a happy relationship. For them, the perfect physical relationship means mutual and simultaneous orgasm. We know, however, that such mutual orgasm is usually achieved only after a relatively long period of time and that for many couples it may never be attained. When the couple feel they are incompetent (by their standards,) they each become anxious and the sexual relationship becomes a focus of increasing tension instead of a release. In addition, the sex act often becomes the main part of the relationship, and frequently the woman finds the periods of dialogue lessening and the man's primary interest is to get to bed. Once again the act has tended to separate the couple rather than to bring them together. The argument that premarital coitus will relax the tensions between two promised people can be discussed in many other ways. First, sex is not a strong bond. As Saltzman has said, 9 of all the human physiological functions which can be studied by objective techniques, sex is the only function which requires the involvement of another person for its fullest biological expression. Procreation only requires physical intimacy, but a full understanding of one's sexuality can only be obtained by studying both people involved. Second, guilt and anxiety usually accompany such activities. These feelings do not necessarily develop because ·of 105 ' I .. : .'~ • ! ','•, •'• personal moral beliefs but feelings of inadequacy, the frequent feeling of the girl that she is being exploited, fear of discovery, and the usual uneven commitment on the part of the girl do develop. These often lead to haste in the sexual act, ·coupled with furtive attempts at concealment. Together, these events tend to · create an atmosphere not conducive to the rich development of love between two individuals. The possibility of venereal disease must be discussed, together with rates of incidence. Pregnancy is always ·a possibility. If you become pregnant and get married, will there always exist a doubt as to whether he would have married you under normal circumstances? How will this affect the stability of the marriage? Many young people have the impression that ·success in marriage is primarily a question of success in bed. Therefore, they wonder, will we be compatible? The argument - is that unless you engage in premarital coitus you cannot possibly know whether you are sexually compatible or not. This is identified by Duvall as the "Try before you buy" fallacy. 3 The sex relationship, as Mace 7 sees it, is, in the last analysis, a function of the love relationship and not the other way around. While a mutually satisfactory sex relationship is important, a lasting satisfaction is the result, rather than the cause, of a sufficient interpersonal adjustment. In addition, numerous studies over the last quarter century have indicated that premarital sexual experience of a woman is no help to her in making a good sexual adjustment in her marriage. 1•5 While the sexually experienced woman makes a more rapid sexual adjustment after marriage, within a short time the premarital virgins are equally sexually 106 responsive. In addition, reeent st !ies indicate that premarital non-v· )ns tend to be unstable and neurotic ~ If this is the case, such factors 1ay influence the stability of marriag md later adjustment. One more factor deserves ment n. I asked the students to considet .his question: what will you tell Jur children when they ask (a) wh . er premarital intercourse is right, ( (b) whether you, their parent , ave experienced such coital beh; .or? McCary8 indicates that many w .1en who have defied the S« ual prohibitions of her generatio by engaging in premarital coitus, flay now carry a residual of repressed tilt. This guilt can break through 1 the form of disapproval of any pren ita] sexual participation of her dau: ter. The disparity between a woman' )ast behavior and her present pc ·ion perpetuates a vicious cycle . f he daughter may be raised with a ' mal ethic which is steeped in guil and shame due to the mother's restt tive admonishments. Thus an · her. problem in sexual adjustme1 is fostered. The conclusion is that prerr. ;ital testing of love and sexual adjust 1ent is not necessarily a good way to s ~rt a solid married life together. ._ is important for the counselor of 1 Jday to realize that our young people .vant something other tha n t he princess-prostitute answer, that is that "good" girls don't and "bad" gir}) do. It is up to us to furnish them w1 th as much solid information as possible. I would suggest that every counselor have available for loan Duvall's Why Wait Till Marriage. This book is a must for counselor, parent, or student. Dr. Duvall demolishes the popular fallacies surrounding premarital sex ual activities without every utilizing an-Linacre Quarterly authoritarian approach. At the same time the book does not contain a · single line that is inapplicable to a · Christian approach to sexual morality. In addition, I would recommend Max Levin's article entitled The Physician and The Sexual Revolt, 6 as well as the more scholarly work of McCary's.8 CONCLUSION We as counselors have little to do with the formation of attitude.s regarding sexual behavior. Our purpose is to support an existing belief, as well as to clarify misconceptions held by the students. It is extremely important that we acknowledge the advantages of premarital . behavior as w~ll as the disadvantages. Unless the student has both arguments before him at one time, he cannot be expected to draw the most propitious conclusions. Finally, we should recognize that the student is present to accomplish the one purpose he disclaims: he actually desires support for his present moral holding. Thus we are facing a basically moral individual wlio is seeking every available reason to maintain his morality. We owe it to his generation, as well as future generations, to furnish the reality of sex and interpersonal relationships. Let us teach morality in every possible manner, including the "no-moral" method. May, 1968 BIBLIOGRAPHY 1. American Institute on Family Relations. Premarital experiences no help in sexual adjustment after mllmage. Family Life, 21:8, pp. 1-2 2. Cuber, J.F. and Harroff, P.O., The Significant Americans. New York: Appleton Century, 1966. 3. Duvall, E.M., Why Wait Till Marriage? New York: Association Press, 1965. 4. Kennedy, Rev. E.E., The 1967 Critic Lecture. The Critic. April-May, 196 7, pp. 14-19. 5. Kinsey, A.C., Pomeroy, W.B., Martin, C.E . and Gebhard, P.H., Sexual Behavior In The Human Female. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders, 1953. 6. Levirt, M., The Physician and The Sexual Revolution. Lirtacre Quarterly. 34:4. 7. Mace, D.R., ·What The Sex Manuals Don't Tell You. McCall's. January, 1958. 8. McCary, J.Z., Human Sexuality. Princeton, N.J.: Van Nostrand, 1967. 9. Saltzman, L., Recently Exploded Sex . Myths . . Medical Aspects of Human Sexuality, 1: I, 196 7. 10. Reiss, I.L., Premarital Sexual Standards in America. New York: The Frier Press of Glencoe, 1960. 11. Reiss, I.L., The Sexual Renaissance. Journal of Social Science, 22:2, Pi· 123-137, 1966. 12. Shope, A.F. and Broderick, C.B., Level of Sexual Experience and Predicted Adjustment in Marriage. Journal of Marriage and Family Living, 29, pp. 424-427, 1967. 107 ., . · .. . ,'! ~··. ~ .: '•, . :·'·; ·~ . .... :· ... · -: ,' 0 • I jt ' 0 ~~ ~: o'•: ~ '/..' If , ..... ·'. '/II' ' I , . ·~:·: ><·: ~ :·· <· .· >: i '·<';:: ~;:, :. I ... •, • If I ~ ·. •' • t ": . t·· : ' 

The  Amoral  Approach to Sex Counselling of Collegians

https://epublications.marquette.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3067&amp;context=lnq

The Amoral Approach to Sex Counselling of Collegians

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

epublications@Marquette