It does seem like the common definition of virgin is changing. The amount of sex had in general has not changed much though.

When I was a moderator for sextips "What is a virgin?"/"I did everything but PIV, am I still a virgin?" questions were very common.

By the absolute dictionary definition PIV (penis in vagina) is the only thing that defines a virgin. But the concept of virginty is one of purity. So it actualy a debate between actions and intent.

I wish I had kept a copy, but at one point I posted a very long rant about all the things someone could do, but still be considered technically a virgin. I covered my bases though, by switching at the end to address the intent of retaining technical virginity, by asking why it was important and how violating the intent of Parental/Spiritual guidelines fit with that intent.

I would think that a unicorn, being interested in purity of soul, would be rather indifferent to the mechanics of the sex act, but much more interested in what others would call innocence and/or character.

So a "technical virgin" would be repulsive to a unicorn.

The way I look at it, sexual activity has a lot to do with the intent of the persons involved. Pursuing orgasm is definitely "sex" to me. Cuddling is not. Fondling is. There have been attempts to pin this line down, but they're awkward and strange.

So by my standard, a Rule Six party is not sex, but if you were doing things that made people uncomfortable and asked the two of you to leave, that would be sex (or at least, sexual).

Warning, however, that the criminal law draws a wide net around definitions of "sexual" for purposes of prosecuting non-consensual or underage activities. I don't think a technical discussion of these would be useful to the conversation.

My guess would be that people are having if anything, less sex than they used to, but publicly willing to admit to a lot more than in the past. This produces the public appearance of more sex out there -- but in fact, a slight decline due to sex ed, VD and AIDS, and changing boundaries within traditional relationships. (The "base" model of sexuality exploded some time ago, fortunately for all concerned.)

That said, you can define sex however you and your (non-?) partner(s) choose to. I guess we should find a unicorn and ask her what she thinks of you. :)

> I guess we should find a unicorn and ask her
> what she thinks of you. :)

Hahaha! :)

I like the "pursuing orgasm" definition. That reminds me, I wasn't pursuing or expecting it, but I once had an orgasm from a long French kiss.

I guess we should find a unicorn and ask her what she thinks of you. :)


You rang? (My HS mascot was the unicorn, after all.)

Heehee. Well, what do you think of me? :)

Well, if you're willing to stand in as our hypothetical unicorn, here are the questions I would ask:

1) Is Todd innocent? (1A: Of what?)

2) Is Todd a spirit of the law or letter of the law kind of person? (Would he twist the definition of "is" or engage in other Clintonesque behavior in pursuit of nook? Alternately, does he always look for the loophole, escape clause, or exception to the general case?)

3) Is Todd equipped . . . um, no, you know, ABLE . . . no, not that, I mean qualified to ride a uni . . . um, skip this one.


And for the bonus question:

4) If you were a unicorn, and you were looking at Todd as a potential virgin, would he qualify under the mythical ("Thou shalt be a virgin.") rule to mount and ride a unicorn (in a strictly non-sexual sense, mind you, this isn't that kind of fairy tale).

However, it is not necessary to actually answer, unless you wish to.

I shall simply say that Todd has the Nolly-corn seal of approval :)