Is a Woman a Virgin if She Only Had Sex with Women?

[B_quietguy]

If a woman had sex with several other women, but has never had sex with a man, would you call her a virgin?

Why or why not?

 

[Enid]

If you want to piss off a dyke, tell her finger fucking/oral sex doesn't count.

 

[tgirlsrgreat]

some will say it all has to do with the broken hymen. so, how big was the strapon that she used on her virginal sister?? please be both descriptive and graphic!!
opcorn:

 

[Enid]

 

[YoungCock1234]

some will say it all has to do with the broken hymen. so, how big was the strapon that she used on her virginal sister?? please be both descriptive and graphic!!
opcorn:

*presses the like button*

 

[B_quietguy]

If you want to piss off a dyke, tell her finger fucking/oral sex doesn't count.

Oh, I'd say it counts. I'd bet a lot of penis-free dykes are much more sexually experienced and knowledgeable than many women who've only had PIV sex.

 

[D_Asston Kutcher]

LOL!
HELL NO!
Can you imagine a "dyke" with several partners telling a guy that she's going to hook up with(LOL a confirmed "dyke" hooking up with a guy? Madness!) that she's a virgin?

Oh, I'd say it counts. I'd bet a lot of penis-free dykes are much more sexually experienced and knowledgeable than many women who've only had PIV sex.

Well yeah, but all of that sexual experience and knowledge is kind of useless. And their technically not penis free if they've used/use artificial phalluses.

 

[B_subgirrl]

I can't see why it matters . . .

 

[petite]

There's obviously a difference between being sexually experienced and the traditional definition of virginity, which I believe is usually defined as PIV sex. A virgin who has had years of getting finger fucked and tit fucked, giving handjobs and blowjobs, and receiving cunnilingus isn't exactly innocent. Some "virgins" even attempt to remain one by engaging in anal sex instead.

Like subgirrl, I don't see why it would matter what the definition is. I get why lesbians would care, because saying that they're virgins might imply that lesbian sex is somehow lesser than PIV sex, but the entire concept of virginity being significant and important is a patriarchal concept anyway, and there's a part of me that wonders if some feminists might be thrilled by the irony of being a "virgin" who gets so well fucked regularly. :tongue:

 

[D_Asston Kutcher]

Look, phallus goes in vagina+sexual intercourse with another human being means that she's not a virgin.
And why would anyone on this site care if a lesbian calls herself a virgin or not?

 

[Enid]

Well yeah, but all of that sexual experience and knowledge is kind of useless. And their [sic] technically not penis free if they've used/use artificial phalluses.

A dildo is not a penis. Some of them may be shaped like cocks but they are not cocks. So yes, a dyke who has never had PIV sex but who uses dildos is still PENIS FREE.

And why is a dyke's knowledge useless if she's never had a cock in her? What a heterosexist view.

 

[cmdb8]

finger tongue vagina dildo aslong as both girls get off its still considered sex

 

[D_Asston Kutcher]

A dildo is not a penis. Some of them may be shaped like cocks but they are not cocks. So yes, a dyke who has never had PIV sex but who uses dildos is still PENIS FREE.

And why is a dyke's knowledge useless if she's never had a cock in her? What a heterosexist view.

Okay.

Wait. A..heterosexist view? Did you just make that up?
Look, did it ever occur to you that the fact that all of her supposedly extensive sexual knowledge comes from having sex with women and using toys means absolutely nothing when it comes to having sex with a guy?
It's not a heterosexist(seriously, did you just make that up?) view so much as a realistic one.

 

[Empathizer]

Heterosexist has been a word since at least the mid 1980s. If you haven't been to university/college, it's understandable that you don't know the word. If you have, perhaps your education was not as well-rounded as you suppose.

It means heterosexual-centric and heterosexually biased and discriminatory.

And it does describe your views on dildos and lesbians.

Welcome to academe. Please to bring a pencil and a pad of paper.

 

[ManlyBanisters]

Actually - knowledge of one's own body and what works sexually for oneself is as important to good sex as knowledge of one's partner's body or of bodies similar to that of one's partner.

If virginity = intact hymen then men are incapable of being either virgins or indeed non-virgins - and yet many, many men and women always refer to the concept of virginity in relation to men. Also, many female humans who've never had any sexual contact of any kind, including masturbation, would not be virgins because a hymen can be broken in a non-sexual situation (many girls who horseback ride from a young age have ruptured hymens, any nasty fall jarring that area can rupture the hymen).

Clearly it is utter shite to say these girls / women aren't virgins.

Virgin, in the broader sense, means untouched - virgin territory, virgin snow, virgin canvas. A woman who has had sex with women is not untouched.

Sex does not have to include a penis, a phallus or penetration of any kind.

Whether or not one individual chooses to recognise the sexual experiences of another as 'valid' or not is completely immaterial.

 

[HiddenLacey]

Isn't this the same as asking if a man is a virgin if he's only had sex with a man?

Everyone may have different opinions, personally I do not consider self masturbation a loss of virginity. IMO once you have had sex with someone you are no longer a virgin.

 

[D_Asston Kutcher]

Heterosexist has been a word since at least the mid 1980s. If you haven't been to university/college, it's understandable that you don't know the word. If you have, perhaps your education was not as well-rounded as you suppose.

It means heterosexual-centric and heterosexually biased and discriminatory.

And it does describe your views on dildos and lesbians.

Welcome to academe. Please to bring a pencil and a pad of paper.

Ah, so it's one of those words or concepts that can only exist as a meaningless passed around abstract saying on college campuses.

And how is what I've said.."heterosexist"? I'm merely saying that a lesbians sexual experience will not translate well if at all too good or passable heterosexual sex. I'm not saying she'll be terrible but it's a distinct and very real possibiltiy.

Ugh. I can just tell this entire thread is going to devolve into some utterly meaningless exercise in pseudophilosophy.
"What is the nature of an orgasm that is shared between to human beings and how does it and a solo orgasm affect the very essence of the human spirit" or some such nonsense.

 

[Empathizer]

No. Not really. You seem to be disgusted with the notion that philosophy about women-only and/or queer-only experiences could possibly be taken seriously.

The word "heterosexist," and all of its kin have meaning because sentiments like that give them meaning. The head-shot to its zombie existence would be for you to open your mind to actually seeing female/queer experience as valid, rather than as practice for some slightly more exotic YouPorn experiments.

 

[B_subgirrl]

And how is what I've said.."heterosexist"? I'm merely saying that a lesbians sexual experience will not translate well if at all too good or passable heterosexual sex. I'm not saying she'll be terrible but it's a distinct and very real possibiltiy.

I'm not even going to address most of what you said - the other women are doing well enough there.

But why the hell do you think it MATTERS if a lesbian's sexual abilities will 'translate'. She's a fucking LESBIAN! She's not going to be fucking any men.

 

[big_tits4big_dicks]

Ah, so it's one of those words or concepts that can only exist as a meaningless passed around abstract saying on college campuses.

And how is what I've said.."heterosexist"? I'm merely saying that a lesbians sexual experience will not translate well if at all too good or passable heterosexual sex. I'm not saying she'll be terrible but it's a distinct and very real possibiltiy.

Ugh. I can just tell this entire thread is going to devolve into some utterly meaningless exercise in pseudophilosophy.
"What is the nature of an orgasm that is shared between to human beings and how does it and a solo orgasm affect the very essence of the human spirit" or some such nonsense.

Being a %100 straight male, what do you know? That's about all I wanted to say. I dunno, I don't understand gay sex between two men, but then again I'm a chick. Sounds like you should stick to what ya know, cuz It aint this.