Purity Balls

RedGlitter · Post by **RedGlitter** » Sun Nov 12, 2006 3:55 am

Let Dad control your sexuality in God's name *shudder*

I find this beyond icky. And why are there no "purity pledges" for BOYS?!

http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/44112/

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Sun Nov 12, 2006 7:51 am

The writeup was a completely unfair and inaccuarate characterization of the video that I watched. Perhaps he was writing of a different one.

I don't see a problem with the sentiments or ideals of the video. Why should I?

Nomad · Post by **Nomad** » Sun Nov 12, 2006 8:37 am

Accountable;456537 wrote: The writeup was a completely unfair and inaccuarate characterization of the video that I watched. Perhaps he was writing of a different one.

I don't see a problem with the sentiments or ideals of the video. Why should I?

I dont know. It seemed kind of oogy to me. Just not a natural or healthy evolution from young lady to woman.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Sun Nov 12, 2006 9:25 am

Nomad;456577 wrote: I dont know. It seemed kind of oogy to me. Just not a natural or healthy evolution from young lady to woman.
What's not? Extracting a promise from Dad to set a good example of what a good man is? Stressing the importance of monogamy?

What am I missing here?

Nomad · Post by **Nomad** » Sun Nov 12, 2006 9:29 am

Accountable;456628 wrote: What's not? Extracting a promise from Dad to set a good example of what a good man is? Stressing the importance of monogamy?

What am I missing here?

All of these things in themselves are healthy and should be taught by parents. The idea of symbolically handing over a young ladies hymen to daddy until he can pass it on to some fetching young lad seems dangerously close to something unnatural.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Sun Nov 12, 2006 5:50 pm

Nomad;456631 wrote: All of these things in themselves are healthy and should be taught by parents. The idea of symbolically handing over a young ladies hymen to daddy until he can pass it on to some fetching young lad seems dangerously close to something unnatural.
I must've missed the hymen handing part. I'll have to watch it again, because I don't remember anything close to that.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Sun Nov 12, 2006 6:06 pm

I don't type as fast as I used to so it took me awhile, but here is a transcript of the oaths the father and daughter make to each other.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Father: I choose before God to cover you as your authority and protection in the area of purity. I will be pure in my own life as a man and a leader. I will be a man of integrity and accoutability as I lead, guide, and pray over you. This covering will be used by God to influence generations to come.

Daughter: With confidence in His power to strengthen me, I make a promise this day to God, to you, to myself, to my future husband, to my future 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.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Hmmmmm. Nope. Not a word about Evil Perv Father flirting, picking a husband, ....... nuttin'. Nary a word about hymen hoisting, either.

ETA: I didn't see anything about Daddy controlling sexuality, either.

Clint · Post by **Clint** » Sun Nov 12, 2006 6:50 pm

I'm puzzled.

I have officiated as the parents and young adult pledge together to accept and support the roles and responsibilities that come with adult bodies. It is something the young woman or young man willingly enter into. There is absolutely nothing wierd or perverted about it. It is the begining of the process leading to the day the young adult leaves the parents and is married. Everyone involved committs to supporting their total success in life.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Sun Nov 12, 2006 7:12 pm

Clint;457335 wrote: I'm puzzled.

I have officiated as the parents and young adult pledge together to accept and support the roles and responsibilities that come with adult bodies. It is something the young woman or young man willingly enter into. There is absolutely nothing wierd or perverted about it. It is the begining of the process leading to the day the young adult leaves the parents and is married. Everyone involved committs to supporting their total success in life.
Dunno, Clint. Maybe our culture has eroded to the point that some people can't see anything but evil in any interest a father shows in his daughter.

Clint · Post by **Clint** » Sun Nov 12, 2006 7:22 pm

Accountable;457375 wrote: Dunno, Clint. Maybe our culture has eroded to the point that some people can't see anything but evil in any interest a father shows in his daughter.

I'm afraid you have hit the bullseye. The long term result will be our cultural then national failure.

daBunnyWendy7 · Post by **daBunnyWendy7** » Sun Nov 12, 2006 8:05 pm

Accountable;457375 wrote: Dunno, Clint. Maybe our culture has eroded to the point that some people can't see anything but evil in any interest a father shows in his daughter.

I agree. A Godly, loving committed father makes the transition to adulthood/womanhood so much more beautiful.

We didn't have a public ceremony but my father always had said say no to ANYTHING you are uncomfortable with AND demand to be driven home if not respected. He said " You can ALWAYS blame me to get out of an uncomfortable or dangerous spots."

Dear RED GLITTER, I love your posts and mean NO offense in seeing something positive in fathers taking a proactive roll in their daughters' well-being.Keep posting.I love the way you get people thinking about more than just front page headlines!:-6

Richard Bell · Post by **Richard Bell** » Sun Nov 12, 2006 10:14 pm

Accountable;457305 wrote: I don't type as fast as I used to so it took me awhile, but here is a transcript of the oaths the father and daughter make to each other.

Daughter: ... I give myself as a wedding gift to my husband.

That's creepy !

RedGlitter · Post by **RedGlitter** » Sun Nov 12, 2006 10:35 pm

There is nothing wrong with doing your job as a parent. However there's a line that shouldn't be crossed. Nomad said it best.

It would be one thing for parents to suggest abstinence of their chidlren but making them pledge as if their sexuality and virginity belongs to their parents and giving that pseudo-husband role to Dad borders on bizarre and kind of sick.

A woman is already giving her man the gift of herself. All of her including her soul. So what if he's the first or not? That is not his business and should not be considered a selling point when fishing for a husband or wife. Those antiquated days are gone.

Why in this century are we still forcing abstinence on the girls but not the guys? Oh I know! Women should be clean and pure and guys should have experience.

Not.

I think if a person (male or female) wants to make a "covenant with God"

about their sexual business that would be fine. But to involve parents, especially one's father, to that extent, smacks of being controlled, and borders on territory that should not be tread by fathers.

What is next, the white towel on the wedding night? That's what it makes me think of- that kind of mentality. :yh_sick

RedGlitter · Post by **RedGlitter** » Sun Nov 12, 2006 10:39 pm

BunnyWendy,

Thanks for your nice comments! That was very thoughtful of you to say.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Mon Nov 13, 2006 4:42 am

RedGlitter;457488 wrote: There is nothing wrong with doing your job as a parent. However there's a line that shouldn't be crossed. Nomad said it best. That it's oogy? What line has been crossed here? I think BunnyWendy said it better.

RedGlitter wrote: It would be one thing for parents to suggest abstinence of their chidlren but making them pledge as if their sexuality and virginity belongs to their parents and giving that pseudo-husband role to Dad borders on bizarre and kind of sick.You saw force in the video? Neither oath says anything about giving any "role" to the father, "pseudo-husband" or any other kind. The video's still there. Did you watch it?

RedGlitter wrote: A woman is already giving her man the gift of herself. All of her including her soul. So what if he's the first or not? That is not his business and should not be considered a selling point when fishing for a husband or wife. Those antiquated days are gone."should not be"? Aren't you the libertarian, defender of people's rights to do as they choose, even if you don't agree with their choices?

RedGlitter wrote: Why in this century are we still forcing abstinence on the girls but not the guys? Oh I know! Women should be clean and pure and guys should have experience.

Not.I believe that's the real issue with you, isn't it? Boys and girls aren't treated the same? It's from this basis that you're imagining all kinds of child abuse that just simply isn't in this video. It's not apparent, and it's not implied. The only suggestion of any kind of abuse is the completely unfounded opinion of the comment author.

RedGlitter wrote: I think if a person (male or female) wants to make a "covenant with God" about their sexual business that would be fine. But to involve parents, especially one's father, to that extent, smacks of being controlled, and borders on territory that should not be tread by fathers.Being involved in major life decisions used to be a key role of parents, even of dads

. Some people think it's a good thing. Why does it seem you are intent on condemning a daughter's love for her father?

RedGlitter wrote: What is next, the white towel on the wedding night? That's what it makes me think of- that kind of mentality. :yh_sickAgain, this goes back to your hallucination of abuse in the video that just isn't there.

RedGlitter · Post by **RedGlitter** » Mon Nov 13, 2006 5:02 am

I'll keep my reply short...

I had love for my own father and he did his parental duty well enough without wanting me to promise I'd never have sex until I was married.

You say there's no force, well there is a certain taint of brainwash. I probablyw oudl have signed such a stupid pledge and then gotten married at 18 just so I could experience this big special magical dangerous thing called sex. I don't imagine I'd be the only teenaged girl to do such a thing.

I said nothing about child abuse.

I said it was sick and I maintain that.

I can't explain it better than I already have. I think you confuse being a parent with control. In my eyes and those of many, sex is part of growing up, part of normal life, not the be-all end-all resulting in marriage. I expect a slag against "family values" or my own values but not everyone shares these same values and yet many of us continue to turn out all right.

This whole concept is about treating girls as Dad's property and I find that repugnant.

If it was a purity ball for boys and Mommy stood up there promising to be the only woman in the guy's life until he was married, would you also go for that?

Watch that video with an open questioning mind and see if you don't get a little of the heebie-jeebies.

Nomad said it best when he remarked about symbolically handing over the daughter's virginity to Dad. There is something plainass wrong about that one.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Mon Nov 13, 2006 5:18 am

SnoozeControl;457566 wrote: Let's look at this from another angle. Would it make you feel slightly uncomfortable watching a video of mothers slow dancing with their sons for most of an evening on a 'date'? No, it wouldn't.

weber · Post by **weber** » Mon Nov 13, 2006 5:21 am

I personally think it would be a lovely thing if more girls (and boys as well with Purity Balls for Moms and sons) remained pure until marriage. Teen pregnancies are devastating.

I see no reason why boys should be able to have sex as they wish, and girls not be able to. Here's to Purity Balls for Moms and sons

Nah....it'll never be universal

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Mon Nov 13, 2006 5:33 am

RedGlitter;457578 wrote: You say there's no force, well there is a certain taint of brainwash.A parent's choices in raising a child is instilling values if you agree with it, brainwashing if you don't.

RedGlitter wrote: I expect a slag against "family values" or my own values but not everyone shares these same values and yet many of us continue to turn out all right.Betcha a dollar she'll turn out alright, too.

RedGlitter wrote: This whole concept is about treating girls as Dad's property and I find that repugnant. That's your own prejudice, your own closed mind, talking.

RedGlitter wrote: If it was a purity ball for boys and Mommy stood up there promising to be the only woman in the guy's life until he was married, would you also go for that?First off, the opposite is not what happened. Will you watch the video, please? Nowhere does it say that Dad will be the only man in the daughter's life until she married. Second, if A mother gave an oath that she would set a good example of what a strong woman should be, and her son gave an oath that he would abstain from sex until he gives himself as a wedding gift to his wife, YOU'RE DAMN RIGHT I'D SUPPORT IT!

RedGlitter wrote: Watch that video with an open questioning mind and see if you don't get a little of the heebie-jeebies. I watched it several times. Enough that I could transcribe the oaths word-for-word, vainly hoping that people would find it harder to take it out of context. How many times did you watch it?

RedGlitter · Post by **RedGlitter** » Mon Nov 13, 2006 5:57 am

I think that would be pretty much your opinion, rather than a natural fact...

Again, I say fine to be an upstanding parent, wrong to control your kid's sex life. It does so say in the video as she signs the pledge card that she will remain abstinent until marriage. Now is she going to get married at 17?! And exactly how will that be healthy? I shudder at the abhorrent notion of being anyone's wedding gift. I suppose there are some who think that's grand but I am not one of them. Entirely too much emphasis is put on abstinence and in this case, apparently, virginity.

Nomad · Post by **Nomad** » Mon Nov 13, 2006 4:25 pm

Accountable;457375 wrote: Dunno, Clint. Maybe our culture has eroded to the point that some people can't see anything but evil in any interest a father shows in his daughter.

AHHHH I thought I was done with this !

Please dont act as if I/we/the others are pariahs because something about it doesnt feel right. The job of parenting should be pretty well solidified by graduation time. If you havent taught your children honesty, self respect, courage given them the opportunity to see what is right living and taught by example by the time they turn 18 then its never going to happen.

Also please dont pull the sanctimonious trip by suggesting I dont believe in the highest standards for our children just because I find this display somewhat unusual.

Accountable !

AussiePam · Post by **AussiePam** » Mon Nov 13, 2006 8:30 pm

Why does "purity" somehow equate with "virginity" here, abstinence from full penetrative sex? For a young woman till she marries.

A "pure" girl can flirt and pash away, be manipulative and bitchy, a complete 'cocktease' - but she's pure as long as she doesn't let a boy go the whole way. This to me sets an extraordinary value on a somehow magic little membrane a lot of girls don't have anyway. And says nothing about "purity of heart".

I believe in intelligence, responsibility, honesty, integrity and commitment in relationships - and in the sanctity of marriage. My parents taught me these values, and I've done my best to pass them on to my children along with the view that life is to be lived to the full.

But virginity???? Grossly overrated.

Clint · Post by **Clint** » Mon Nov 13, 2006 8:45 pm

I’ll never forget Dad’s talk when I was about 13. It’s sure to make some people angry but here goes¦.

“Son, would you rather have a used car or a new one?

“I’d rather have the new one Dad.

“When you get married do you want a wife that’s been used?

“No Dad.

“Then wait until you’re married and don’t cause any women to be used when they marry somebody else.

AussiePam · Post by **AussiePam** » Mon Nov 13, 2006 8:52 pm

Clint;458588 wrote: I’ll never forget Dad’s talk when I was about 13. It’s sure to make some people angry but here goes¦.

“Son, would you rather have a used car or a new one?

“I’d rather have the new one Dad.

“When you get married do you want a wife that’s been used?

“No Dad.

“Then wait until you’re married and don’t cause any women to be used when they marry somebody else.

Clint - I completely reject the idea of "damaged goods" as it is applied to women - by men obsessed with "virginity".

A man "using" a woman is totally out of kilter with the values I mentioned. A young woman allowing herself to be "used" also is totally out of kilter with them.

A person who has been in a previous committed relationship is not a user or a used thing.

Clint · Post by **Clint** » Mon Nov 13, 2006 9:06 pm

When penetration occurs, both the male and female are changed from moment on. It can't be undone. There will always be either the conscious or unconscious comparing of one partner to the other and if there are multiple partners they are all compared to each other. What had never been used for that purpose has now been used for that purpose. It has been used.

RedGlitter · Post by **RedGlitter** » Mon Nov 13, 2006 9:08 pm

I couldn't agree more, Pam.

I find men with those attitudes to be the chauvinistic, caveman type. Not any kind of man I would want to marry. Nor would I teach my son to have such a disregard for women.

Clint · Post by **Clint** » Mon Nov 13, 2006 9:12 pm

That's where these discussions end up. One uses logic and the other resorts to name calling and insults.

RedGlitter · Post by **RedGlitter** » Mon Nov 13, 2006 9:13 pm

Clint;458600 wrote: When penetration occurs, both the male and female are changed from moment on. It can't be undone. There will always be either the conscious or unconscious comparing of one partner to the other and if there are multiple partners they are all compared to each other. What had never been used for that purpose has now been used for that purpose. It has been used.

So ignorance is bliss? That what it sounds like. I agree that sex touches one's soul. I do not agree that it makes one used as it is always different with each person one engages with. It is always a meeting of two souls.

I'm not going for the comparison thing. I certainly can't see myself saying "Gee. soandso was so much better!" And if I did, so what? If a eperson wants to stay a virgin until marriage that would be fine. But it's not my business, the church's business, anyone else's business to monitor that or to define a person's worth by an individual's private experience.

RedGlitter · Post by **RedGlitter** » Mon Nov 13, 2006 9:14 pm

Clint;458607 wrote: That's where these discussions end up. One uses logic and the other resorts to name calling and insults.

Please. No one did any such thing. Although I do find that attitude of a woman as damaged goods to eb very insulting to me, to women and to people at large.

Clint · Post by **Clint** » Mon Nov 13, 2006 9:37 pm

"I find men with those attitudes to be the chauvinistic, caveman type"...name calling?

Look, I'm not passing judgment on anyone. I don't have the right. I do have the responsibility as an adult parent to protect children from experiences that will harm them. Sex with one partner for life is the ideal. I want nothing less for my children and any child I influence.

I've done a lot of unwise things in my life. I don't spend the rest of my life defending them as wise. I use them as examples for what shouldn't be done and learn from them. I also try to help others avoid the same experience if I can.

Sex is serious business. It is the ultimate experience of intimacy for a couple. It results in procreation. It leaves an emotional imprint. It can result in STD’s. And it isn’t intended for casual recreation like so many people treat it.

Attitudes about sex today are dangerous and destructive. They destroy the ultimate experience by making it common.

RedGlitter · Post by **RedGlitter** » Mon Nov 13, 2006 9:46 pm

Clint, I didn't call you any names any more than you have implied I am a used woman who doesn't take sex seriously just because I do not share your viewpoint. Believe me, if I call someone a name, there won't be any doubt that I've done so. That said, I stand by what I said. I do feel that way, just as you feel as you do.

I agree completely that sex is serious business, etc, but i do not see one partner for all as any kind of ideal. Now I used to, when I was a teenager but I soon realized that was not for me nor was it realistic. Make no mistake, I am not cheap. My encounters have been done with love, respect and some things I don't have appropriate words for at this time. Sex with anyone can be a mistake and marriage is no guarantee. I think it's great to instill the serious and yet magical properties of sex into all humans but I draw the line at that. I would never teach my children that sex with more than one partner is a mistake. If you're going to have sex with anyone, you take risks and that needs to be made clear. But to label any man or woman as damaged goods because they've given themselves to more than one is inappropriate, judgemental and damaging in my opinion.

guppy · Post by **guppy** » Mon Nov 13, 2006 9:57 pm

teaching children that they should wait and only stay in one marriage for life can be very counter productive. i grew up with this ideal version of life. yea, it works in a fantasy life, not in the real world. i stayed in a marriage that ran amock for years because i didn't think i had the moral right to leave. This is where thinking you are used goods if you leave can get you. imho.

in hindsight, i should have left after the first year. if i didn't so totally believe the crap about to death do you part, i might have had a better life in my twentys, and thirties. I was the only one who valued the marriage anyway.

Teach your kids all the morals you want but also tell them the realities of life. how to protect themselves. stand up for themselves. and give them the ability to make the decisions they need to do to live as much a healthy life as possible. Educcate them on stds, on everything you can. on abuse, on when to call it quits. dont shove your values down their throats so hard that they are not capable of making less than ideal but nessesary decisions to make their lives better. imho

gupster

Clint · Post by **Clint** » Mon Nov 13, 2006 10:01 pm

I'm sorry that what I said has caused you pain. I just don't think this can be an honest discussion if only things that people want to hear are said.

I said that when something has been used it has been used and the first time experience is forever gone. I never said it didn't have any value left.

AussiePam · Post by **AussiePam** » Mon Nov 13, 2006 11:37 pm

Clint;458624 wrote: I'm sorry that what I said has caused you pain. I just don't think this can be an honest discussion if only things that people want to hear are said.

I said that when something has been used it has been used and the first time experience is forever gone. I never said it didn't have any value left.

I think there are some men who feel threatened if a woman has previously been with another man. It's a sort of retrospective jealousy and maybe this goes with performance anxiety. It may also demonstrate the emphasis some men put on the sexual act itself which I think is a less important factor for women within the gamut of a whole relationship.

Clint - how do you feel about a woman who has loved/been in love with another man, but not had full penetrative sex with him?

Any relationships are going to involve comparison at some level, though where a person is secure in themselves, this may be a positive accepting, experience.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Tue Nov 14, 2006 4:28 am

Fer cryin' out loud, ya'll. It's a formal promise to treat something special as special, nothing more.

Anything else is your own paranoia/guilt/prejudice/whatever seeing things that are just not evident in the video.

Clint · Post by **Clint** » Tue Nov 14, 2006 7:09 am

I don’t think anyone here actually thinks I’m comparing women to cars. It’s just a way to deflect what I’m saying. I’m also one who never buys a new car. It doesn’t make sense to me anymore. I can tell you that when I was younger I bought couple of new ones and it was pretty cool¦I just can’t make sense of it economically now.

A woman who has not saved herself for marriage or who has been married and is marrying again is a valuable human being who can be an excellent wife. The same goes for a man in the same situations.

I am simply saying the ultimate would be for both the husband and the wife to go into marriage never having known someone else sexually. The things people do leading up to penetration each have their own threshold that once crossed are crossed for life.

A father and mother who participate with their son or daughter in vows of purity are simply trying to help preserve for them the ultimate experience of intimacy so it can be shared with the one they choose as a husband or wife. The want the very best for them and they want them to avoid the dangers of unwanted pregnancy, STDs, and damaged emotions. How can that possibly be bad?

I have to go to work...Have a great day.

RedGlitter · Post by **RedGlitter** » Wed Nov 15, 2006 2:06 am

Wow. Diuretic, you said just what I was thinking all along. The whole thing.

One of the things about this that upsets me the most, is virginity=good values while apparently a lack thereof does not. I think that's a rotten thing to judge someone by. Just like my objection to these "purity balls" has been seen as a rejection of strong, upstanding morals/values. I don't think that's correct.

Nomad · Post by **Nomad** » Wed Nov 15, 2006 2:12 am

Accountable;458697 wrote: Fer cryin' out loud, ya'll. It's a formal promise to treat something special as special, nothing more.

Anything else is your own paranoia/guilt/prejudice/whatever seeing things that are just not evident in the video.

Theres a video ?

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Wed Nov 15, 2006 4:29 am

Nomad;459692 wrote: Theres a video ?
:yh_eyebro *checking leg and chain for telltale signs of pulling or yanking*

RedGlitter · Post by **RedGlitter** » Wed Nov 15, 2006 8:51 am

Accountable;459740 wrote: :yh_eyebro *checking leg and chain for telltale signs of pulling or yanking*

:wah:

zinkyusa · Post by **zinkyusa** » Wed Nov 15, 2006 9:05 am

"Purity Balls" :sneaky:

never mind, bye

AussiePam · Post by **AussiePam** » Wed Nov 15, 2006 1:16 pm

That was my initial reaction too, Zink !!!! GUFFAW!!