"i do." "err, i mean i won't." "wait, what is it, daddy?"
the other night i turned on the news in time to catch a fascinating segment on what appears to be the hottest thing to hit the united states abstinence movement since the silver ring thing. during a "purity ball," girls are accompanied by their fathers to what seems quite the party, exceedingly wedding-esque: there are fancy dresses, white cakes, first dances, even vows. and what young girl doesn't like a wedding? especially where she gets to play bride! except at her purity ball, instead of vowing to spend her life with that one special person, she vows not to do a few specific things with any special people to another person altogether. oh, daddy.
that's right, if the event's somewhat presumptuous-and-mildly-insulting-in-my-opinion name didn't do it for you, at a purity ball, girls vow to their fathers to remain abstinent until they are married. in return, their noble, noble patriarchs swear to protect their daughter's chastity.
after all, said the father of a 12 year-old who pledged abstinence at a recent ball in south dakota, in "today's day and age, if the daughters are sexually active before they're married that ceremony really is meaningless because the father's not giving anyone away." and his (twelve year-old) daughter surely made him proud with her solemn declaration: "i'm going to stay pure until i'm married and I'm not going to date or kiss a boy."
her father continues, "i saw so many young girls get hurt by the whole dating process. people are just chasing after instinct, chasing after their pleasures and desires and that's going to sting in the end." indeed, many have been "stung" in the dating process. it's very risky business, that. not part of normal social development or anything, though.
in any case, apparently thousands of girls have taken purity vows at purity balls since 1998, when the first such event was held by "generations of light," a christian ministry in colorado springs.
one article i found about purity balls includes the following sentence: "the event's purpose is to celebrate father-daughter bonding, but the main focus of the evening is for the fathers and daughters to exchange pledges in an elaborate ceremony." the "event's purpose is to celebrate father-daughter bonding"? really? we can't do that over ice cream anymore? a baseball game? a tv show, even? does it have to be over the daughter's virginity?
though i think that sort of logic is unfortunately very much consistent with the pro-abstinence mindset. you know, "let's talk about it in terms of it being a bonding event for fathers and their daughters." yes, the "main focus" is ensuring some sort of archaic chastity [i'd hardly be surprised at this point if some new organization pops up to actually reinstate the chastity belt — i'm sure advances in the textile industry could make for some very comfortable products, indeed] situation, but there's also this fantastic bonding "purpose." it's about family. it's about values, morality. purity. very nice how they spin that.
it's almost reminiscent of how they spin the fact that there's even a remote possibility that abstinence-only education works. of course telling young people to just not have sex it the best way to go. silly, unnecessary information about condoms and other forms of birth control with which they can protect themselves should — deep breath — their pledge of chastity to their daddies go astray. no no, better just show them horrifying pictures of sexually transmitted infections. scare tactics and omission of real education in schools is definitely the way to go. oh, and did i mention that statistically, 88% of abstinence pledges do go astray? well, hey, at least the 12% who don't have sex until they're married are in excellent shape. as are, i'm sure, their fathers. just glowing with pride on their little angel's wedding day because he can say that he actually has something to give away at the ceremony. because a daughter who had sexual relations prior to her wedding night doesn't quite count, you know? there's just something missing. a history. a bond. i don't know, the strange pseudo-incestuous feeling i got from watching a father in a suit squeezing his twelve year-old daughter's hand and vowing to protect her chastity?
the bush administration, by the way, is now handing out approximately $200 million to abstinence programs. that's right, federal funding.
abstinence-only education doesn't work. these abstinence initiatives don't work. they are dangerous. it is a disservice to young people in this country if we delude ourselves even for a second into thinking that kids can take a virginity pledge and be done with it. even if they kept the pledges, which research proves they do not, don't they have a right to comprehensive education about their sexuality? shouldn't they be making informed decisions?
and leaving aside the numbers for a second, on a more purity ball-specific and personal note:
i bonded a lot with my father growing up. and i'd have to go ahead and say that none of those experiences included his taking me out for a night on the town (or at the holiday inn) so i could swear i wouldn't have sex until i got married. and i suppose i could be terribly mistaken, but i don't think i'm worse off for it. i don't even think that being properly educated about such things was my the beginning of my descent into immorality — even amorality — and disgrace. and i'll come right out and say it: i actually don't believe that should i decide to get married someday, i'm going to be worried about whether my father thinks he was wronged and left with nothing to "give away."
i mean, come on. he and i both know i'm a handful anyway.
that's right, if the event's somewhat presumptuous-and-mildly-insulting-in-my-opinion name didn't do it for you, at a purity ball, girls vow to their fathers to remain abstinent until they are married. in return, their noble, noble patriarchs swear to protect their daughter's chastity.
after all, said the father of a 12 year-old who pledged abstinence at a recent ball in south dakota, in "today's day and age, if the daughters are sexually active before they're married that ceremony really is meaningless because the father's not giving anyone away." and his (twelve year-old) daughter surely made him proud with her solemn declaration: "i'm going to stay pure until i'm married and I'm not going to date or kiss a boy."
her father continues, "i saw so many young girls get hurt by the whole dating process. people are just chasing after instinct, chasing after their pleasures and desires and that's going to sting in the end." indeed, many have been "stung" in the dating process. it's very risky business, that. not part of normal social development or anything, though.
in any case, apparently thousands of girls have taken purity vows at purity balls since 1998, when the first such event was held by "generations of light," a christian ministry in colorado springs.
one article i found about purity balls includes the following sentence: "the event's purpose is to celebrate father-daughter bonding, but the main focus of the evening is for the fathers and daughters to exchange pledges in an elaborate ceremony." the "event's purpose is to celebrate father-daughter bonding"? really? we can't do that over ice cream anymore? a baseball game? a tv show, even? does it have to be over the daughter's virginity?
though i think that sort of logic is unfortunately very much consistent with the pro-abstinence mindset. you know, "let's talk about it in terms of it being a bonding event for fathers and their daughters." yes, the "main focus" is ensuring some sort of archaic chastity [i'd hardly be surprised at this point if some new organization pops up to actually reinstate the chastity belt — i'm sure advances in the textile industry could make for some very comfortable products, indeed] situation, but there's also this fantastic bonding "purpose." it's about family. it's about values, morality. purity. very nice how they spin that.
it's almost reminiscent of how they spin the fact that there's even a remote possibility that abstinence-only education works. of course telling young people to just not have sex it the best way to go. silly, unnecessary information about condoms and other forms of birth control with which they can protect themselves should — deep breath — their pledge of chastity to their daddies go astray. no no, better just show them horrifying pictures of sexually transmitted infections. scare tactics and omission of real education in schools is definitely the way to go. oh, and did i mention that statistically, 88% of abstinence pledges do go astray? well, hey, at least the 12% who don't have sex until they're married are in excellent shape. as are, i'm sure, their fathers. just glowing with pride on their little angel's wedding day because he can say that he actually has something to give away at the ceremony. because a daughter who had sexual relations prior to her wedding night doesn't quite count, you know? there's just something missing. a history. a bond. i don't know, the strange pseudo-incestuous feeling i got from watching a father in a suit squeezing his twelve year-old daughter's hand and vowing to protect her chastity?
the bush administration, by the way, is now handing out approximately $200 million to abstinence programs. that's right, federal funding.
abstinence-only education doesn't work. these abstinence initiatives don't work. they are dangerous. it is a disservice to young people in this country if we delude ourselves even for a second into thinking that kids can take a virginity pledge and be done with it. even if they kept the pledges, which research proves they do not, don't they have a right to comprehensive education about their sexuality? shouldn't they be making informed decisions?
and leaving aside the numbers for a second, on a more purity ball-specific and personal note:
i bonded a lot with my father growing up. and i'd have to go ahead and say that none of those experiences included his taking me out for a night on the town (or at the holiday inn) so i could swear i wouldn't have sex until i got married. and i suppose i could be terribly mistaken, but i don't think i'm worse off for it. i don't even think that being properly educated about such things was my the beginning of my descent into immorality — even amorality — and disgrace. and i'll come right out and say it: i actually don't believe that should i decide to get married someday, i'm going to be worried about whether my father thinks he was wronged and left with nothing to "give away."
i mean, come on. he and i both know i'm a handful anyway.
posted by blythe at 3:04 PM
<< Home