Friday

purity favors

I've written before about how disturbing I find the trend toward "FATHER DAUGHTER PURITY BALLS"

Now, via FEMINISTING, I discover that there is actually a new industry springing up to PLAN AND ORGANIZE THESE PURITY BALLS

And here's one of the "party favors" you can give out:

survivorkit

18 comments:

karrie said...

Wow. No sex after divorce? I had no idea how far they took their particular brand of crazy.

What's inside the party favor bag?

Laura Linger said...

I was extremely close to my late father, Bob. There is still a big hole in my heart where he used to be.

However, as close as we were, the subject of my virginity never, ever came up. The thought of going to a "purity ball" with anyone, much less my FATHER, my sperm donor, the man who changed my shitty diapers, just skeeves me. Big time.

I like that Flickr thing you have on your sidebar. I'm going to get one, too.

Sarada said...

You know, this sort of thing is most popular among evangelical Christians. Evangelicals base their faith on an emotional experience (their moment of getting saved) and their services are also geared towards emotional appeal (bands, drama skits, etc.). I think that they tend to apply the same idea to the abstinence movement. If they can get a girl to connect emotionally to the idea that she should remain a virgin until marriage, then she will be more likely to hold on to the resolution.

While there probably is a patriarchal overtone to only targeting the girls, I think it is mostly a practical measure. Boys would be more likely to pray, along with St. Augustine, "God grant me chastity . . . but not yet."

Anonymous said...

I think you are right about the emotional appeal. there are solid reasons for abstinence. however some of this stuff isnt working and perhaps people should ask why. it certainly isnt because chastity is unattainable. however a pledge made due to emotional appeal is probably more apt to be shelved than one made for good solid well thought out reasons.
further I might add that God is really not brought into the equation that much, odd that this is from christians. its almost ALL about the bad things that can happen to you if you indulge. well, just like some of the drug abuse and tobacco scare tactics it doesnt work well because a)teens think they are invincible and b)all you have to do is look around and see there are people who have escaped at least immediate consequences and are doing quite well despite indulging and finally c)if you can find a way to circumvent the consequences (pregnancy, disease) by being more careful, more choosy, more knowledgable, thhen it will be OK, there is nothing intrinsicly wrong with fornication only the bad results it produces. so do away with those results and you are home free.
RARELY is chastity brought up in a context of obedience to God, an obedience that sometimes we dont understand the reasons fully for, we just need to obey Him. its all about whats in it for you to live this particular way.]
it is true that societally we have paid for free sex in many many ways. many individuals reap these consequences. BUT there are a lot of people who have, so to speak, gotten away with it. and that muddies the water for people who are strictly looking at outcome as the basis for their moral decisions.
I have to say though, if you read htis stuff closely these favor bags have NOTHING to do with father daughter purity balls. this party advertised is, if you look even casually at the ad, a girls only party targetted to the black community.

Elizabeth said...

Recently at our church camp, some of the priests were talking with the high schoolers, answering any questions they had about our faith. Of course, dating and sex came up. One of the priests (whom I don't know) started talking about what they did with their kids--"I guess we never did this with our son, but we did with our daughters." Yeah, duh. Anyway, they gave their daughters a "chastity ring." The concept was that the ring was to remind them to "save it" until marriage. Up to here I was pretty much okay with the idea, only a bit squicked. Then he said that on the wedding day, the girl is to give this ring to the husband-to-be as a gift, to lay her chastity at his feet as a gift to him. The husband-to-be would then bring it back and give it to the parents.

At this point I was totally icked out. My kids' virginity is not mine to keep, or to be given as a gift. It is theirs and theirs only.

Georgia said...

No to be crude, but does the party favor bag contain a vibe?

I find it interesting that divorce is mentioned and seemingly ok...but sex without the bounds of matrimony isn't ok.

I'd have figured that most folks who would be into all this chastity deal would also be against divorce.

Sarada said...

Divorce varies by denomination. I believe only the Catholic and Orthodox expressly prohibit divorce (except for civil divorce in abuse situations), but the amount of annullments makes it seem as though they have a divorce option.

Evangelicals, while frowning upon divorce, actually divorce at the same rate as the general population. So, serial monogamy?

Elizabeth said...

The Orthodox church does not forbid divorce and even permits people to be re-married, for a total of up to three church weddings. I think my church is quite pleasantly hands-off in this regard, actually.

Personally, I think the point of "no sex after divorce" is kind of a punitive "well, you can go ahead and divorce, but you won't be allowed to enjoy it."

Suzette said...

OMG! did you go to her page and read about her? She goes into the "survivor" description of having a home with a "shower and only a tub" AND a phone "with only rotary dial no pushbutton" further she had to "help gather wood for heat for her family"...doesn't sound much different than many people's upbringing. My dad still lives in my childhood home and guess what? He still has the ROTARY PHONE! Do you think I should call him on affore mentioned phone and beg him to get out while he can from this crisis situation?.....unreal!

Sarada said...

I stand corrected, Elizabeth. I was assuming the meaning of "ecclesial divorce" was the same as the Catholic annulment, which would say that there was never a true marriage in the first place.

But why three remarriages? It seems a bit arbitrary.

Anonymous said...

Pardon my immaturity.
Pardon my vulgarity.
But, my new favorite slur is tell the offending party that she/he sucks father/daughter purity BALLS.
becky

Anonymous said...

What kind of party favor bags would they give out at a "promiscuity ball"?

Anonymous said...

Q.What party favors would be given out at a promiscuity ball?

A. The phone numbers of some of the coolest single folks that I know.

becky

Anonymous said...

you know, you can joke about the idea of purity. but you cant have it both ways. just scroll down to Granjus post about the young girls that are totally sexualized on my space. despite the people that appear to be "getting away" with fornication these young girls feeling they have no worth aside from their sexuality is a logical fruit of the sexual revolution. you dont get it both ways. you cant be "icked out" at the idea of waiting till marriage but then also be "icked out" at the idea of sex ruling everything. they go together.
now for the near identical church divorce rates, why do you think the church is so powerless in America? they have a "do as I say not as I do" mentality. this is not because the standards are too high, its because so many christians do not take God seriously. he is a pal to visit with on Sunday morning to make sure all goes well with you during the week. and then of course the world responds by making fun of them. if they really lived biblically there would not be anywhere near as much snickering about the church as there is.

Elizabeth said...

Sarada, the number three for divorces is totally arbitrary. I'm not sure of the original intent, but it seems that the need was felt to put a cap on it *somewhere*. There is an actual service for re-marriage, but it's hardly ever used anymore because it is quite repentant in nature. It talks about the two parties being weak and needing this marriage in order to control their sinful passions, etc. Not exactly what you want to be hearing on your wedding day....

Suzette said...

I can only speak for myself on "having it both ways" thing. I believe in waiting because of my religious beliefs. I hope my daughters choose to wait until they are married to have sex. But! I think it would completely freak them out to have this kind of party or "pact" with their dad. We have talked about our reasons for waiting, they have studied our beliefs in church, we have open discussions about it. They also don't have sexy pictures of themselves on their "myspace" account, in fact they only have pictures from far enough away that their faces aren't visible. And their accounts are Private. Yes, I do find the Father/Daughter thing strange. I don't think it's a choice between waiting or going totally opposite and becoming a hoochie either.

Anonymous said...

Suzette pinpoints the idea of moderation and common sense that is inherent in Katie's posts. Of course, it is much more fun to "misunderstand" and write rambling and poorly articulated missives. Then, NOT sign one's name.
becky

Anonymous said...

oh give me a break on the fixation about anonymity.
I believe Katie has stated that she is very much against abstinence and that everyone should have a trial sexual run before marriage in case you know, the person sucks in bed you can cross them off your list.
I believe that I said that some of the methods that are used in some circles to promote abstinence are cheesy and worse, counterproductive. if emotional appeals make someone want to be abstinent then OTHER emotional appeals can sway them the other way at a future date. I also dislike the fact that so many abstinence promoters focus on the bad things that can happen to you if you indulge in premarital sex. yes its true that societally unwed motherhood and disease skyrocketed as a result of premarital sex. however that isnt going to happen to everyone. when people see others getting away with what they were threatened would be so disastrous they rethink things. it is like overblowing the dangers of drugs to get kids to abstain. the more they scare the kids, the more effective they think it will be. a far more lowkey, honest discussion would reap much better effects.
as far as Katie goes, she has promoted NON abstinence for teens on her blog and then she laments how so many of these girls see themselves at the same time. she fails to see giving kids a message that the best they can hope for is to delay things until they are (or think they are) "in love" is in fact tied in with the objectification of kids at younger and younger ages. she fails to see waiting until they are married as a very viable option and in fact makes fun of people who promote that. if you read her posts, she is not just mocking silliness in the church, she is mocking the very biblical concept of abstinence. and this my friend, you CANNOT have both ways: telling kids they are animals who "need" sex or they are being deprived and young girls ultimately being seen as merely objects for young boys gratification. (or the other way around..I know a lot of these girls are in VERY hot pursuit of the boys these days..one could probably talk until the cows come home about who exactly is using who and not reach a consensus)
I think these parties are sort of hokey BUT the idea behind them which is that kids should be talking to their parents about sex, is far far from hokey. however it could probably be done in a much less gimmicky way.