I had two choices at the end of my first date with my husband: put out or no second date. He didn’t directly say so, but it was understood. So I put out. I wanted to anyway, so it wasn’t like it was some traumatizing thing. But the fact that I wanted to was in conjunction to the fact that I had to do so if I wanted to continue seeing him. Understand?

So, I willingly became his concubine, like 80% of other women do with their men. And I (and they) enjoyed it, but I was very much wanting his commitment, too. My choices, again, were this:

- Put out immediately. Continue to see him. Have a slim hope that he will put a ring on it.

- Do not put out. Do not see him again. Have no hope that he will put a ring on it.

(Reminder: I was a lapsed Christian and he was an atheist, so two sexually-active Christians *might* have a slightly different script, but it will probably only be a matter of how long they wait to jump in bed together).

The right choice would have been the second one: do not put out, do not see him again, do not get a ring.

But—and here is where it gets tricky—suppose I had done that? Suppose I had continued doing that? I’d be 44 and single. I would also be righteous and blessed by God—but I’d probably have no husband. As it stands, I was unrighteous and I got the prize. I have a man who committed to me.

Again: It is WRONG but that does not make it UNTRUE. See the difference? Other women see this. They see this example, and they understand what it means. In particular, non-Christian women see this choice: put out and eventually you may get a man to commit. Don’t put out and you will never get a man to commit. Even if they WANTED to be chaste – which they don’t – how could they? They only could do so if they committed to a single life. As they should, but who wants that? I didn’t. Neither do most other women.