Daddy's Little Hymen: Purity Balls

There is something creepy about Evangelical Christianity’s newest tactic, “Purity” Balls. The basic idea behind them is that too many girls are having sex and that the way to fix this is to take have them publicly promise their virginities to their fathers. But why should I tell you about it? Why don’t you just watch this one “trailer” for it?



What I do not understand is the ickyness people attach to human sexuality, especially to feminine sexuality. We are, at our core, sexual creatures. I cannot truly understand why people would seek to to pretend sexuality is this big, special thing, when it really isn’t.

My incomprehension aside, let me discuss why I find these programs offensive and creepy.

They don’t work:

There is no data on whether girls who attend purity balls remain abstinent until marriage; chances are many do, given the tight-knit communities they live in. But there is striking evidence that more than half of teens who take virginity pledges—at, say, rallies or events—go on to have sex within three years, according to findings of the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health, the most comprehensive survey of teens ever taken. And 88 percent of the pledgers surveyed end up having sex before marriage. “No pledge can counter the fact that teenagers [and all people] are, in fact, sexual beings postpuberty [and prepuberty, in my opinion],” notes Cary Backenger, a clinical psychotherapist in Appleton, Wisconsin, who works with teens, including several who have taken virginity pledges. “You can’t turn that off.”

Disturbingly, the adolescent health study also found that STD rates were significantly higher in communities with a high proportion of pledgers. “Pledgers are less likely than nonpledgers to use condoms, so if they do have sex it is less safe,” says Peter Bearman, Ph.D., a Columbia University sociologist who helped design the study. For these teens, he believes, it’s a mind game: If you have condoms, you were planning to have sex. If you don’t, sex wasn’t premeditated, which makes it more OK. The study also found that even pledgers who remained virgins were highly likely to have oral and anal sex—risky behavior given that most probably didn’t use condoms to cut their risk.

Glamour

Really, would you honestly remain celibate solely because you had signed some contract to your father when you were four years old? Would you really care what you had said at some stupid ball? The “promise” was not really “yours,” so why keep it?

My complaint comes from the main premise behind this whole ceremony. The “contract” is essentially that a daughter’s “virginity” should be property of either her father or her husbands, but never of her own self. Just listen to the contract that a girl must sign:

I make a promise this day, to God, to you, to myself, to my future husband, to my children, to remain abstinent until the day I give myself as a wedding gift to my husband. I know that God requires this of me, that He loves me, and that He will reward me for my faithfulness in this life and the next.

Have these people been living in such a time warp that they still believe a daughter should be treated as a gift? Is her purpose nothing more than that of her man-folk’s sex puppet? Many of these people also criticize objectifying women, yet they see nothing wrong with treating their young daughters as gifts.

The completely overwhelming sexist nature of these events are apparent to those willing to take a step back and look at it carefully, yet no one participating in the balls seem to care that the daughter has been completely left out the equation, the father is in charge of finding the proper man, and the daughter is expected to consummate her relationship, in short, men are in charge of what goes into her vagina, but she is not. Does this not strike anyone as more than a little anachronistic?

Sexual stereotypes are further enforced in the premise that the man should protect and shelter his daughters from the evils of sexuality, and that woman must separate themselves completely from sexuality in order to remain whole. Men, on the other hand, are relatively free from any stigma relating to their sexual activities, and no one pays much attention to their coming-of-age. Some might argue that since the father is also required to also required to sign a contract promising to “be pure in [his] own life as a man, husband and father,” he is held to the same standards as the woman he protects. But I question why they wait till fatherhood to make this promise. Why have these people ever suggested having a “mother-son” purity ball? Are the boys not in need of protection from the femme fatales of the world? Should the mothers also not pledge to be pure and protective of their sons? One blogger theorizes that the principal difference is the thin piece of tissue known as the hymen, that will supposedly indicate whether or not the girl is a virgin (which is complete bull, I know, but symbols need not be realistic). The act of tearing it is a more concrete symbol than the emission of billions of sperm cells into its place.

I find the exaggerated sentimentalization of girlhood offensive. The idea behind these balls—that girls should remain as a child until they marry—is simply another form of the typical desire on the part of their parents to never see their young girls mature into women. Notice the language used by Susan Chess at the beginning of the video, where refers to the fathers as “daddy.” How more belittling can you get? Boys, on the other hand, seem to be expected to grow up as fast as possible. It is not coincidence that, until recently, women had two major titles, “Mrs.” and “Miss” but boys could get away with simply “Mr.” Girls need to grow at some point, or their bodies will get ahead of them.

Finally doesn’t anybody find it more than a little creepy that the fathers should have such a feverish obsession over their daughters’ sexuality? This isn’t really an argument, but it is something I noticed.

Please, tell me what you think

References:

ya right, my dad would also

ya right, my dad would also say same,fantastic post.wanna more like this,thnx.

Attempting to Make It a Positive Thing

I think the whole point of the purity balls is to make virginity a positive thing. There's a lot of reasons to abstain: HIV, STDs, teen-pregnancies, etc. There's a lot of negative pressure for virgins amongst their classmates. So, it's one giant "pat on the back" for saying "no." However, this purity ball could backfire: a non-virgin could be socially ostracized from her virgin friends if she doesn't attend, so she goes anyway to not give away her little secret. So this purity ball isn't bullet-proof.
-------
OliviaB.
Seattle DUI lawyer

Fantastic post. Bookmarked

Fantastic post. Bookmarked this site and emailed it to a few friends, your post was that great, keep it up.online roulettepoker siteonline blackjackvideo pokerdownloading movies

reply

It seems we have taken several sets back as women instead of moving forward. From the purity balls to the quiverfulls, when did a woman's worth return to her reproductive system, and not her brain and her heart. It is disturbing in this great nation.
marirea penisului

Each man would dream of the

Each man would dream of the whole wife.

>And sex before marriage IS

>And sex before marriage IS committing adultry.

No it isn't. Adultery means the act of adulterating something - mixing it with something else and making it impure - in this case, a marriage. Unmarried people can't commit adultery - there's no marriage to adulterate.

okay, no sex is NOT a bad

okay, no sex is NOT a bad thing.
But sex was intended for marriage.
And sex before marriage IS committing adultry.
We are all made for one person, and one person only, and should reserve ourselves for them, so by having sex with another person, that's giving yourself to them, and you're not to be with that person that your'e having sex with, but instead with another of whom you will be married to.
Sex was made for marriage, not for before.

And yea, maybe the whole abstinence ball thing is a little weird.

If a girl decides to choose abstinence(which should be all) it should be her own decision, and it's not something you just go off telling everyone.
Yeah, if they're asked to be involved in sex ,she should tell the guy her views on it, and tell him no, I chose abstinence.
But it's not something you just go around telling everyone.

I have the most respect for people who chose abstinence and aren't out every weekend w/ their bf/gf having sex, but instead choose to remain pure for their meant-to-be. I think that's the best gift you could ever give your future spouse.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
Captcha
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Unless otherwise noted, all content on this blog is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License. Please attribute to emess

Creative Commons License

Design - Luka Cvrk. Drupal Port by ADT Drupal Themes.

sfy39587f11