More women are asking for prenups

Sun Sentinel ^ | September 18, 2005 | Georgia East

[Caipirabob]

Over a casual dinner, Rachel Kaplan turned to her boyfriend and asked, "You're open for a prenup, right?"

Darren Waldohlz, 38, a partner in a successful speed-dating business, admits he was caught off guard. But he said he realized a prenuptial agreement would protect the house he owns, too.

"It's not that I plan to get divorced," says Kaplan, 23, a single mom from Fort Lauderdale, who has a sizable inheritance. "I have to protect myself and my daughter."

While men are still more likely to seek a prenup, "women are becoming a more dominant force," said attorney Alan Braverman, who has offices in Fort Lauderdale and Boynton Beach.

Experts attribute the change to women marrying later or more than once.

"It's not uncommon in today's world that women are entering marriages with assets and stock options," said matrimonial attorney Jacqueline Valdespino, in Coral Gables. "Now both sides have equal bargaining power."

[Age of Reason]

Well, I've found another link in the chronology:

From Webster's 1828 edition (no mention at all of a virgin being a man):

VIR''GIN, n. nearly vur''gin. [L. virgo.]
1. A woman who has had no carnal knowledge of man.
2. A woman not a mother. [Unusual.]
3. The sign Virgo. [See Virgo.]

So I add the 1828 entry to my chronology:

1200: virgin means a chaste woman of great piety.

1300s: first known use of virgin for a man (which for all I know may have been used by a gay man to describe his boyfriend).

1828: man as a virgin is NOT mentioned at all in Webster's

1960: a man as a virgin is the sixth definition in Webster's--way down the list.

1980s: a man as a virgin has climbed to number 2.

2000's: And today, the number 1 definition of virgin is no longer a female--but a "person."

And so the women's libbers have won: men are now officially feminized

[nopardons]

You still don't get it! ROTFLOL

Different dictionaries, even those with Webster in the title, don't list definitions in the same order, nor, for that matter, include as many definitions of a specific word.

BZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ! You've lost this round, as you've lost every single other one.

You're beating the dust of this long dead horse and just continuing your fool's progress. ;^)

I guess that you're just so lonely, that any attention is preferable to being ignored completely; which you are so used to.

[Age of Reason]

IN both of my dictionaries, one published in 1960, the other one, published in 1989, both have it at the sames place...in sixth position.

In what position is the definition of virgin as a man in the most recent edition?

Still number 6?

And what is the number 1 definition of virgin the most recent edition: still only a female?

The far flung assumption that you've thrown out, saying that for all YOU know ( and who are YOU anyway, but a biliously childish nobody, without any expertise whatsoever in words and word derivations ?), the use of the word VIRGIN, in connection with a man, in 1300 was a homosexual, absolutely ruins your protestations!

So let's see--

I lose my credibility by saying "for all I know"?

Well I guess a "biliously childish nobody' has no credibility.

[Rca2000]

I REALLY wish that you would stop going around on this merry-go-round of yours, about the word"virgin".

You have been doing this for 2 DAYS now, and where has it gotten you?

Except to get thoroughly spanked by a long-time member of FR. And believe me, you HAVE been spanked, GOOD AND HARD, by nopardons!!

SO WHAT if it(the use of the word "virgin" to describe a pure man)is 1st, 3rd, 6th, or 1000th, in the various dictionaries, that you have skimmed over. It STILL means the same thing!!

[nopardons]

You've highjacked this thread, you obviously adore to be continuously humiliated in public, your attitude toward girls and females is not "traditional" ( as you attest it is ), nor is it Conservative in any way, and you appear to be incapable of using logic and engaging in debate.

In reply to your first query, I will only respond with another question.......WHICH DICTIONARY?

Do you know what a controlled test is?

[Age of Reason]

Different dictionaries, even those with Webster in the title, don't list definitions in the same order, nor, for that matter, include as many definitions of a specific word.

But Webster's is not the only dictionary. And neither have we compared all the editions of all dictionaries through the years to follow the progress--if of the changing meaning of the word, virgin.

And we also should know that not all dictionaries agree exactly with others of the same time.

But had we a large enough sample, we might better chart any change in the meaning of virgin.

So why not just look at the number 1 definition of the word, virgin through the years.

Surely there will more agreement about the number 1 use of a word even in different editions of the same vintage from the same publisher.

And so, what is the number 1 definition in your books?

Man, Woman, or Person?

[nopardons]

Mental masturbation, but at least it will relieve you of the other kind and perhaps, keep you from posting more drivel to FR, for a while. Go for it! LOL

[Age of Reason]

WHICH DICTIONARY?

The most updated version of the two you quoted from, of course.

Has man as a virgin moved up in the order of the definitions?

[Quick1]

I have car insurance, but I'm not planning on getting in an accident. It's sad that we have to do this, but even when you know, or think you know your partner, it's still a good idea to get a pre-nup.

Think of it this way, if you REALLY know your partner, and you will never ever divorce, what harm could there be in having a prenup that you will never use?

[Age of Reason]

Mental masturbation, but at least it will relieve you of the other kind and perhaps, keep you from posting more drivel to FR, for a while. Go for it! LOL

What is number 1 definition of "virgin" in the dictionaries you've been quoting from?

[nopardons]

*crickets*

[Age of Reason]

Since the advent of the sexual revolution, has the number one definition of "virgin" changed from being exclusively female to a person of either sex in current editions of the most respected dictionaries?

Is this a question you fear to answer?

[nopardons]

You can't read and understand what is written, obviously, so get someone to explain ALL of my previous posts to you. The answer you claim I "fear" to answer, was explicitly answered last night, before you managed to come up with the query.

[Age of Reason]

You have been doing this for 2 DAYS now, and where has it gotten you?

Had nopardons stayed on topic and written concisely, we could have settled this a long ago.

But now I've fear he's used up all his keyboard's capital letters, and can no longer contribute to resolving this.

[Age of Reason]

Since the advent of the sexual revolution, has the number one definition of "virgin" changed from being exclusively female to a person of either sex in current editions of the most respected dictionaries?

What is the answer, please. Is it that complicated?

If you don't know, it's OK to say so.

[Rca2000]

You like capital letters, ok-- here are some::

WHAT DA%M DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE, WHAT POSITION IT IS, IN THE DICTIOINARY???

And btw-- while we are at it, you may as well know-- No pardons is a WOMAN, buddy!!

Further, you claim to "have the traditional beliefs". However, in a much earlier post, you claim" I would never marry a woman that had sex before marriage" THEN, in the same post ,you claim"but I would have sex with her". SO, which is it that you want(and I am serious here): do you believe in sexual purity until marriage, or NOT?? The question is simple, but you have made it seem complicated.

[nopardons]

There are seventeen,SEVETEEN definitions of the word "virgin" in my 1960 WEBSTER'S ENCYCLOPEDIC UNABRIDGED DICTIONAEY OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE.

There are twenty,TWENTY definitions of the word "virgin" in the 1989 edition of the same dictionary.

Where a definition is listed, is not all that significant; except that in the dictionaries I own and have named, absolutely NOTHING whatsoever has changed, regarding the placement of males virginity, POST the sexual revolution.

Yes, I realize that it offends your twee ( which is a real word and not a misspelling, BTW ) sensibilities, that your virginal state might be interpreted as "feminine", but that's too bad. There are VIGIN forests and oil and stock offerings and snow and and gold and soil and olive oil and all kinds of other things that are genderless.

And OTOH, there really ARE and have been, girls and women who are hymenless,through horseback riding and other nonsexual, non-contact with a male member nor implement of any kind, who are considered to no longer be virgins.

Besides being a masochist, you also appear to be an obsessive. Bad poddy training, pet? Is that why you hate your mother and all girls and women?

[cyborg]

The reason why I asked you if you are a christian is because the standards of sexual purity apply to both a man and woman. Your original comment that prompted this discussion suggests that you aren't. Even if you aren't a christian, I think today's society warrants some standards. You are a man and as such, men can pass on STDs without symptoms. You can 'have sex with her' but you know you can pass on a disease to your virginal bride after you've proven how much of a non-virgin you are.

[Conspiracy Guy]

My wife, Freeper Laura Earl Emailed me that one.

[Rca2000]

I am a Christian, but I don't think he is, and YES I FULLY agree that the purity standard applies to both men and women. He never answered my questions about purity, either. I think we all scared him off!!