Is it just me who finds this creepy?

[mickeym]

In Pursuit of Teen Purity

The pictures are bad enough -- the one at the top of the article has (presumably) two fathers and two daughters, and one "couple" are in what seriously looks like a couple-y pose. *shudder*

The whole thing is creepy, in my opinion, but this passage from the article just creeps me the fuck out (bolding is mine):

When Kylie was 13, her parents took her on a hike in Lake Tahoe, Calif. "We discussed what it means to be a teenager in today's world," she says. They gave her a charm for her bracelet--a lock in the shape of a heart. Her father has the key. "On my wedding day, he'll give it to my husband," she explains. "It's a symbol of my father giving up the covering of my heart, protecting me, since it means my husband is now the protector. He becomes like the shield to my heart, to love me as I'm supposed to be loved."

In theory, I get the idea behind the Purity Balls. But why isn't anyone addressing this with boys, too? Why isn't anyone getting all the kids together and saying "hey, you know what? You don't have to have sex, or (whatever, fill in the blank). Just be kids, have a good time growing up."

Honestly, I think the whole focus on 'purity' is more than a little weird (and not a little Victorian. Or, y'know, medieval.). If people want their daughters to be pure, well. Let's get rid of "french maid" halloween costumes for *children*. Or crop tops. Or shorts, etc., that have words written across the butt, or the other myriad of girls' fashions that seem determined to flaunt and exploit children and teens' sexuality.

And for God's sake, include the boys, too!

Comments

[rainbow.livejournal.com]

To me the whole idea that anyone is "pure" if they haven't had sex is creepy. Humans have sex. It's natural. It's normal. Yeah, even kids in most cultures practice sex play, just because it feels good. Yes, there are emotional and cultural reasons why it's not always a good idea in our screwed up western culture, but purity? Cue massive squick alert.

Plus it seems like a pretty obvious ploy to control girls and women, by telling them that they belong to their father, then to their husband, and gosh, what's not to lvoe about that? ::shudder::

[mickeym.livejournal.com]

YES. I don't want to "belong" to anyone! And also, reading the rest of the way through the article, it talks about one girl who was assaulted and gave up wearing her purity ring because she felt guilty, as she wasn't pure any more.

I just. *flails* There's enough issues already with mixed messages and crap regarding sex and sexuality...there is no need to add another layer there! And her parents supporting her through therapy and *getting her another ring to put on*. Come ON.

Massive squick alert, for sure. Yuck.

[zortified.livejournal.com]

The article` says that purity events for boys are in existence and 'growing in number.' I also found that as much emphasis was placed on the fathers being good role models and providing their daughters with guidance, as it is about 'making girls be demure virgins owned by their fathers.'

I think a lot of what's behind this is good - the idea that parents should promote the idea of sex being not a casual thing for kids to engage in, but something that's a big deal that should wait until they're older. Whatever your views on sex being important or ok for casual flings, and whether porn is good or bad, I think "sex" is something that people should put off until they're old enough to deal with it, which most teens aren't.

Like anything, it can be viewed or taken to bad extremes, but the idea that fathers should take responsibility for raising their daughters through the teenage years and accepting that sex issues are a part of that is a good thing.

But having a father keep the lock on his daughter's heart.. yeah, a little creepy. ;-)

[taselby.livejournal.com]

that parents should promote the idea of sex being not a casual thing for kids to engage in, but something that's a big deal that should wait until they're older.

I'm of two minds about this. I think part of the problem is that sex *is* held up as this Big Special Gateway to Adulthood. I do think kids should wait, but in the meantime I think we need to demystify sex. It's not that big a deal, almost everybody does it eventually, and the first few times are usually *bad.* Pull the soft-focus romance filters off of it.

Plus, I really think that girls especially need to be actively taught that sex and *love* are not equivalent. Boys seem to figure this out early, but girls have more trouble untangling it.

But more (non-creepy) parental involvement is good, I agree. Though I don't want my kids to be "demure" anythings *g*.

[mickeym.livejournal.com]

I think part of the problem is that sex *is* held up as this Big Special Gateway to Adulthood.

Sex, drinking, and driving. Interesting, yeah? These are the things that are dangled in front of kids as incentives/rewards. "This is what you get to do as soon as you're ________yrs old."

I think it would't be a bad idea to demystify ALL of those. Particularly since kids seem to combine all three of them and then we end up with some really big messes.

I know for me? I wish someone had taught me that sex and love aren't the same. It's one of the issues I'm still struggling with, today.

[taselby.livejournal.com]

Word to that! I keep waiting to feel like an adult. I've got all the obvious trappings of adulthood, but I still feel like someone is going to call me out as poser and send me back to the kids' table.

And oh, yeah, the untangling of sex and love. I'm working on that one, too. And trying to armor my kids against some of my bigger mistakes.

[zortified.livejournal.com]

Oh yeah - sex and love are not the same, and more teenagers need *love* and less sex. Here in Sacramento, girls age 16 (and I think, younger) advertise their prostitution services - and they had a news segment where they talked to one and she said how it made her feel special and loved.

Not to mention the girls who get or want to get pregnant so they can be loved by the baby.

[taselby.livejournal.com]

Oh yeah, and it doesn't help to untangle love and sex when most people use euphemisms like "make love." Granted, my TV and movie viewing is limited, but what I see is a lot of cautionary horror (sex is EBIL ZOMG!) and soft-focus romance (my Prince will come and love me forEVer) but not a lot of practical realism or good advice for teens. And certainly not enough parents are themselves educated or involved enough.

I find it interesting that my oldest daughter, who was 5 and 6 when her siblings were born is the one of my kids most emphatically clear on NOT wanting kids of her own. Hell, maybe they should start including a little child psych with the sex ed. Most kids don't even recognize that their parents are actual people until about age 8.

Again, I'm full of love for Mim's high school. The family life class assigns kids those 7 lb baby dolls that cry loudly at random intervals and have to be "comforted." It's definitely a reality check.

[mickeym.livejournal.com]

Like I said, in theory, I get it, and I don't object to the idea of kids staying "pure" (or whatever). It's the tone, the whole possessive ownership thing that comes through and makes me want to back away with my hands up to protect myself.

[apetslife.livejournal.com]

I have always, ALWAYS been creeped out by the Purity Balls and the similar events. YUCK. What really brought it home to me was watching the Jessica Simpson reality show, and how grossly overinvolved her father was with the state of her hymen. Seriously. I threw up a little in my mouth. Reading about it is one thing, seeing it on TV is another entirely.

ETA: I am 100% in favor of fathers connecting with their kids, boys and girls, and playing a huge role in their lives. I would be the first in line to support a movement that encouraged that kind of bonding. But the overtones of 'ownership,' 'protectorship,' and the whole connection of "female purity" as the ultimate in her value as a person squick me to the point of nausea.

[mickeym.livejournal.com]

Didn't Papa Simpson have some similar issues with his daughters' breasts, too? *shudder* Ick and yuck.

But the overtones of 'ownership,' 'protectorship,' and the whole connection of "female purity" as the ultimate in her value as a person squick me to the point of nausea.

Yup. In a major way.

[thehighwaywoman.livejournal.com]

*shudder* Yes. Definitely creepy.

[mickeym.livejournal.com]

I'm *really* glad to know I'm not the only one completely squicked by this whole concept.

[taselby.livejournal.com]

I think the whole notion of parents owning their kids' sexuality creepy and badbadbadwrong. *Especially* this idea of fathers handing over their daughters' "purity" to her husband. The whole concept makes me feel like I need a shower.

What the FUCK happened to teaching our kids to be their OWN persons? To be responsible for themselves and learn how to make good choices? What's next? Chastity belts?

And what in the hell do they actually mean by "purity" (and GOD that word skeezes me out)? No penetrative sex? Oral sex? Petting? Necking? Kissing? Short dresses? Midriff tops? Where is the line? And this really gives me an uber-creepy "sorry, boys, this is all for Daddy until he decides he's done with it" way.

Maybe I'm out here alone in the way I'm raising my kids. Sex isn't a one time "birds & bees & babies" talk, it's a running dialogue. Open forum. I'm of the "here is all the information, here is what's happening to your body." And beyond the raw biology of it, I'm doing my level best to dismantle that fuck-headed PATRIARCHAL notion of female sexual "purity." For my girls AND my boy. ("Yes, waiting is better. If you can't, here is how to protect yourself and your partner. Sex *isn't* love. Don't confuse the two. Like chocolate and peanut butter, they are great together, but usually exist seperately. Virginity -- male and female -- is a crap notion. You are not magically changed, enlightened, dirty, impure, damaged, or anything after you have sex. You are still you.")

What is WITH people? Sex-obsessed prurient puritanical FUCKERS. *RAGE* When these "purity pledge" girls are ready to have sex, they won't need Daddy's permission. It's like those goddamned viginity rings. It doesn't stop kids from having sex, it just lessens the chances that they will protect themselves from pregnancy and disease.

What kids need is honest, no-shit information. "Just say no" didn't work in the 80s, and it doesn't work now, even when you dress it up in formalwear and make it unbelievably creepy.

Crap. I have no icon for this.

[withdiamonds.livejournal.com]

You said everything I wanted to say, only so much better. You give your kids the info they need, then you let them live their lives.

[taselby.livejournal.com]

Thank you. This topic just rips me open with rage and squick.

Re: kids, I figure it's their life, and they need good information to make good decisions. I admit that I get tested every so often. I promised myself that to the best of my ability I'd answer any question they brought me, because if they are ready to ask the question, they're ready to hear the answer.

When my oldest daughter was 7, she asked "what's sex?" So I gave her the bare penis-in-vagina definition (I'd refine it when she was older). She looked at me, thought, and said "That's the most disgusting thing I've ever heard."

My youngest daughter, when she was 7 (why these things happen at 7, I've no idea) asked "What's an orgasm?" *laughs* That one was tougher.

[mickeym.livejournal.com]

My youngest daughter, when she was 7 (why these things happen at 7, I've no idea) asked "What's an orgasm?" *laughs* That one was tougher.

*snickers* You and me, lady. We've got some awesome kids, yeah? *g*

[mickeym.livejournal.com]

You're not alone in how you're raising your kids. I started laying the foundation for sex talks when Matthew first started asking -- following like you said, if they're old enough to ask, they're old enough for SOME sort of answer. And you know (as does anyone who reads this journal) that Matthew and I have an ongoing dialogue about sex, and anything and everything relating to it.

What kids need is honest, no-shit information. "Just say no" didn't work in the 80s, and it doesn't work now, even when you dress it up in formalwear and make it unbelievably creepy.

And really, why is it that anyone feels there needs to be a formal dance for this? What about the kids/parents who can't afford a fancy dress and/or suit, or where there is no dad around, and hasn't been? I really was impressed (NOT) with the dude who's fathered nine kids on seven different women, and who is now 'stepping up' to be a role-model. Dude. Keep your pants zipped up, or wear a rubber, or get a fucking vasectomy. You go around fucking that many women, you're a walking billboard for STDs (among other things). Be a role-model by NOT IMPREGNATING EVERY WOMAN YOU SEE.

I think my train of thought derailed. Ugh. Now I'm all rage-y and stuff, so I should probably go make dinner. And you're welcome to use my "stabbitystabstab" icon, here *g*

[taselby.livejournal.com]

(takes icon) Thank you!

You note that the 9-kids-guy is only stepping up now because he has stage-4 lung cancer.

I read the article in full, and really, part of the problem (aside from the OTT SQUICK of it all) really hit me in the last few paragraphs where they talked about "dating with intent." Nobody just *dates* any more. It's all "going together" / boyfriends / girlfriends / exclusive couples, and the thought that each relationship might be "the one" and last forever. That's a lot of pressure when teens should be going out with a lot of different people, being friends, having fun, and sneaking kisses in the back of the theater.

But that one father, wanting boys to come ask for permission to get to know his daughter? WTF? That's a recipe for rebellion simmering on the stove.

And what the HELL with the 4-year-olds there pledging their "purity"?? *squick squick squick*

[dragovianknight.livejournal.com]

"Yes, waiting is better. If you can't, here is how to protect yourself and your partner. Sex *isn't* love. Don't confuse the two. Like chocolate and peanut butter, they are great together, but usually exist seperately. Virginity -- male and female -- is a crap notion. You are not magically changed, enlightened, dirty, impure, damaged, or anything after you have sex. You are still you."

That? That is pure awesome right there.

[cereta.livejournal.com]

All of that. Yes.

Purity balls have alternated between making me blind with rage and nauseated with ick since I first head of them.

[vickita.livejournal.com]

Y'know, here's the thing: people have sex. People have *ALWAYS* had sex. And they tend to start thinking about having sex, 'round about puberty-ish.

Nothing anyone has ever done (that I'm aware of) has substantially changed this. People have always had sex. Kids (in the sense of 15-16-17-ish being kids) have always had sex. Young girls have always gotten pregnant. Thus has it ever been; thus shall it ever be. Hiding one's head in the sand doesn't make it go away. Generally speaking, people *deal*, or it gets ugly, real fast.

I live in Oklahoma, where an awful lot of fundamentalists like to teach that it's not okay to have sex before marriage. What that results in is lots of people getting married in their late teens or early twenties, because zomg, NOBODY (for Bell curve values of "nobody") can make hold out much past that. And the early marriages result in? Early divorces.

People need to get over it. Teach kids how to keep themselves safe from STDs and unwanted pregnancy, teach them about *human relationships* and valuing themselves, and hope they grow up to be relatively un-fucked-up, productive members of society.

That's my feeling about it, anyway.

[taselby.livejournal.com]

Exactly. I live in what's essentially the midwest of California. And for a lot of these kids, marriage = permission to have sex. So we have a lot of young mothers, single mothers (because of divorce or abandonment), and teen pregnancy because all the kids hear from their families is "sex is bad, don't do it" and never how to protect themselves once the biology takes over.

And a lot of it is tied up in poverty, lack of education, lack of opportunity, and all that jazz. It's a big knot. Fortunately the sex-ed (when parents don't opt their kids out of it) is top-notch at my older daughter's high school. The summer session brought in a lecturer from Planned Parenthood for a week. Mim was full of hand-flapping enthusiasm. There was even a unit on homosexuality, and another on abusive relationships.

CA never drank the Federal "Abstinence Only" kool-aid.

[winterweathered.livejournal.com]

The idea of my father carrying around a KEY TO MY VIRGINITY would make me DIE.

Then again, I'm weird when it comes to this stuff. I'd never let my dad walk me down the aisle at my wedding because (1) I am not a possession to be 'given' away and (2) a father's role and a husband's role are NOT EVEN CLOSE TO THE SAME SORRY.

I respect people who choose to wait. I sure as hell didn't, but I respect the decision. I don't like the trend of wearing the status of your V-card as jewelry. I think that wearing a ring/bracelet/t-shirt that announces that you're a virgin is a little bit slutty in itself - do you REALLY need to announce your sexual experience level to the universe? Is how much sex you are or aren't having REALLY that defining of a characteristic?

Ew.

[withdiamonds.livejournal.com]

People have sex. It's the whole point of puberty, to get us ready to begin having sex. It's not a process we can stop or delay. It's culture that has made it so that we are supposed to wait until a magic age or magic legal status to start doing something we're biologically programed to do.

And the idea that a father is that involved or invested in his daughter's sex life is beyond creepy. Or a mother, or a son, for that matter.

[cormallen.livejournal.com]

I've read about this before, and it has only gotten more creepy. Going from "belongs to Daddy" to "belongs to Hubby" just doesn't sit right with me (and that's if you don't even touch the fact that single mothers are nothing unusual).
The very idea of a parent owning their child's "purity" is an abhorrent concept to me. I remember what I was told as a child and teenager about sex, I know what my friends were told, and I know what I ended up doing. And combining that with what I know now, from working with teens, from seeing their parents' influence in their lives - I believe that the best thing a parent can instill in a child is that sex is natural, normal and healthy. That there is a right time for it, that there is nothing wrong with exploring, and learning one's own body before learning someone else's. That there is nothing wrong with being prepared, with knowing what sex actually entails, what it can mean emotionally as well as physically, that actual protection such as condoms (and whatever additional things one chooses to use) is key, but so is trust and care and... well, this isn't something you just plunk on top of your child's head at some ball. It's not one conversation, it's not two conversations, it's not dressing your daughter up in a pretty dress and taking her to a dance where you tell her "don't do it" so you can feel like you fulfilled your parental duty.
It's about making sure your child trusts you and knows you care, and is comfortable talking to you about sex and relationships and the body and any other issues he or she might be concerned about. It's about the child knowing that his or her parents have relationships - and sex - or don't - just like anyone else. I've never understood that so common response, that whole, "ew, my parents have sex? I hope it was just the once". We all have bodies, and needs, both physical and emotional, and addressing those needs in a healthy, fulfilling way should be the key, not... some kind of freaky bracelet or a fearful promise of "I'll be your little girl up until you give me away to the guy whose little girl I'll be then."
Eesh, LJ doesn't want me to add to this, because it chopped off the last bit of my comment, so editing to just end it on the above note.

[geeklite.livejournal.com]

I'm not sure I could get within a mile of one of these 'purity ball' things without having to be carried away screaming. Not only is it a "no", it is a "HELL NO" or maybe an "OMFG THIS IS THE 21st CENTURY WTF?"

Ugh. Just ugh.

[tabularassa.livejournal.com]

TOTALLY creeptastic. Ugh.

[dragovianknight.livejournal.com]

I have to say, my squick meter was going off over those photos. :-\

[paradox-dragon.livejournal.com]

You got the couple-y vibe right. In some places they're even called Purity Weddings and the fathers give daughters rings and wedding cake gets served for dessert. The girls call time spent with their dads dates and its the only "dating" they're allowed to do until someone courts them with father's permission & intent to marry. The father-daughter dating is supposed to model the right way girls are supposed to be treated by the guys in their lives. It squicks me the hell out.

[geneli4.livejournal.com]

they whole stupid concept, and those bracelets, fuck, don't even get me started. UGH.

SO CREEPY, ON SO MANY LEVELS, OH MY GOD.

[rivers-bend.livejournal.com]

that bolded sentence is what creeped me the fuck out in what I read of that too. Plus, the whole idea of 'purity' makes me sick. Sex is not un-pure. and my father sure as HELL has nothing to do with what/when/with whom.

[fourfreedoms.livejournal.com]

The pictures remind me of NAMBLA! I am appalled.

Holy shit though, I don't think we need the purity balls for the girls at all. I don't understand why they aren't locking are boys up if they want to strictly enforce abstinence. If you want the girls protected from sex and all the rest, let them do whatever, and keep a closer watch on the boys. I've never understood that, girl's are a lot more trustworthy when it comes to drugs, alcohol, the car--whatever, and yet, we choose instead to place our trust in boys who have a higher statistical likelihood of risk behavior. I hate our culture sometimes.

[munibunny.livejournal.com]

Um... I don't know what to say...

[ihearthings-ii.livejournal.com]

Ick. Just, if women were doing this with their sons, that's be considered weird, you know?

[shinycuba.livejournal.com]

These things totally freak me out - they remind me of serie episodes where similair things are going on, and in the end it turns out that the father is often abusing his daughters or so. You know? And those pictures are indeed terrifying, it doesn't look normal. It should be a youngster's choice, definitely, but this is just so .... weird. It's like Britney Spears and Miley Cyrus and those Disney girls declaring they will remain a virgin until they marry, and then three years later they're all "Welll whatever". So why did you first try to act superior and now just... you know? Meh. Some people I'll just never understand.

And if I was a guy marrying someone who's father would 'give' me a lock to his daughter, that would make me run for the hills. I'm just saying. Makes me think of Papa Joe Simpson, Jessica Simpson's dad, you know? He also always is so weird about his daughters in a creepy way.

[merihn.livejournal.com]

The thing I hate most about these kinds of things, as you've said, is that it's focused on GIRLS. What about the boys who often pressure girls into having sex? Why don't we focus on how so much of the messages going out to kids these days that girls can only get guys to like them if they have sex with them? Why don't they change the message to guys that they have to have sex to become a man?

I find it really creepy with the father-daughter thing.
♥