The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent
vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums
here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules
document is now in effect.
"Purity Balls", Or Objectify Them While They're Young
Posts
Daddy's Little Hymen
I Survived My Purity Ball and All I Got Was This Lousy T-shirt
Youtube knows all/Daddy’s little hymen
Who wants to join me in hosting a Slut Ball?
Bill Maher on purity balls
Segment in Dr Phil, "This culture is not my standard; my father is my standard because he tells me who I am to be in life."
Quick Video Hit: Purity Balls
There's nothing rebellious about "purity"
The chastity-industrial complex (AIDS "awareness", "Integrity balls" for boys)
More Purity Ballz
That's just some of the older entries regarding this from two blogs.
Check out this one especially:
Purity or Integrity?
It is a de-humanizing, objectifying, pseudo-incestuous means of "property" control, basically. Just another thing coming out of archaic views on gender roles, sex and sexuality.
EDIT: The Thrill of the Chaste, Introduction/Chapter 2.
Yes, I must say, dads telling their daughters that they love them and want to protect them is one of the worst things happening in society today.
Thats not really what I got from the article. Did you read the article in the OP?
Look the message is obvious here, I can't believe we are even arguing about it. If your not doing your best to make your daughter a slut and using you own misguided world view to objectify her then your just a bad parent.
Its pretty obvious that these parties send one message, and one message only.
If i cant hit it, no one can
[/sarcasm]
It's all good fun until someone loses their eyes.
It's possible to do somethnig special with your daughter that doesn't involve obsessing over her virginity. Crazy but true.
Yes, because according to this article, this is the ONLY thing these fathers have ever done for their daughters.
The fundie girls I knew in college all skanked out the moment they got away from their parents
What's a "slut"? Isn't that just one of the main terms used to attack and denigrate females for participating in basic unisex behaviour? Like "whore"?
Hmm... I just don't know. Given your participation here for example, I thought you might be able to enlighten me given your apparent experience of applying concepts and rhetoric partly stemming from ideas supporting such notions.
Oh, dear... Parents who do this do it as a means to protect their daughters from objectification?! The very nature of the pro-chastity/pro-abstinence/anti-sex/anti-choice idealogy objectifies young girls/women by reducing their worth to their vaginas, their future everything hinging on what happens to enter it. It's just the same old religious fundamentalism at work...
Protect them from what exactly? Taking into account the driving forces and reasons for aforementioned idealogy, and the unhealthiness of the manifestations of such idealogy rendering this kind of "protection" less than ideal anyway (not mentioning most still end up having pre-marital sex, just in that lovely ignorant and dangerous way)...
Show how what he said could generally be interpreted as not a stab at those advocating against this practice.
Yar. Pretty much that.
From here:
Just a small tidbit among thousands upon thousands of tidbits showing off the standard fundie-fathers-obsessing-over-their-daughters-bits-phenomenon.
With some tweaks these "purity balls" could be changed to "esteem parties", and I'd be totally on board.
Edit: What I did like from the article was stressing that the father should be a good role model. When a young woman's father treats women disrespectfully around her, she eventually starts to think that's just how relationships with men work. Though, I'm doubtful that's the kind of advice the fathers at these things are getting.
I agree. These balls are doing exactly the opposite - ascribing worth to women based solely on their sexual state.
It's just hinky.
No one said this. You continue to miss the point.
Nail. Head.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
guys don't stop i'm close
Awesome.
I'll admit, it's a bit creepy. But I'm not sure why it's objectifying or anything like that.
Would it be the same thing if there were young men involved instead of young women?
Well that's a cop-out answer if I ever heard one.
Yes, because refusing to disconnect a behavior from the social context is a "cop-out."
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Buh?
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Admittedly Daddy-Daughter balls are a bit creepy when they're aged 17+, I have no problem admitting that. It'd be much less creepy if it were a Mother-Daughter day (which I've also heard happening).
I just still fail to see the objectification.
So since we're "well aware" of it, we are not allowed to condemn it? I have no idea where you're going with this.
The emphasis placed on virginity is what is objectifying about this.
Er, among fundie christians it is just as important for males to remain virgins until they are married.
Well that's fine, you don't believe in that, that's fine.
I'm still not seeing objectification. If you emphasize that you don't want your son or daughter to get a tattoo, does that mean you're objectifying them?
I'd say there's a pretty clear message here: a woman belongs to her father until she belongs to her husband. She never belongs to herself.
If there were never a point in history where women were treated like property; if there wasn't this whole atavistic ritual involving a father "giving away" the bride at a wedding; then maybe I wouldn't see it that way.
If there was ever a time in this country where men were treated like property in analogous fashion, given like prime cattle from mothers to brides, then perhaps I'd see a gender reversal argument as holding water.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.