OP said this:

But it's vitally important for the overall health of the relationship to not have sexual intimacy for at minimum 6 months, and ideally at least longer than a year

reading comprehension: needs work

I think, at the core, my argument is simply this: don't rush into sex. Take your time to figure out if this is really what you want.

I believe everyone can agree to that statement. But my perspective is that quantifiable, actionable advice is more helpful than advice in which the recipient has to apply their own judgment (what's the purpose of giving the advice then?), and so I have semi-arbitrarily chosen that 6 months to wait is a safe bet and 1 year is ideal.

And I acknowledge that waiting a year is unusually chaste - that's why I consider it to be an ideal circumstance rather than a practicable target. Is waiting a year for sex unusually risk-averse? Yes, undeniably. But you also can't deny that waiting that time would give you the best perspective on whether or not it's a good idea to have sex with someone