oh the hipocrisy...as he dons his asbestos suit

[ProdigalJunkMail]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=3164702&mesg_id=3164702

This thread has my mind reeling here. Why the heaps and heaps of hatred for these people? It seems that these girls are old enough to make the decision to have sex but somehow NOT old enough to make the decision to not have sex. Is it just the ceremony that is causing the problems? Or is it the fact that these people believe that sex before marriage is wrong? I know some of you hate religion in all forms, and that is fine, but for the others of you...why the venom?

I have three daughters. My belief structure holds that sex outside of marriage is not something that was intended for us. I will teach all three of them that. I will also tell them that their mother and I were NOT virgins when we got married. That we did have sex with other people before we married. And I will tell them that we wish we hadn't (because that is true). I will prepare them for either eventuality. And we will love them through either and not make them feel dirty if they do decide to have sex (or even go a different religious route) before marriage. We will not do one of these little ceremonies...but there are a lot of men who feel they ARE the protector of their families. What is wrong with wanting to protect your children from something that you honestly believe to be wrong?

Is it not ok for people to believe that way? Is it not ok for them to have their little ceremony, that will likely mean nothing if the beliefs aren't really strong or when the hormones get going like there is no tomorrow? Why the venom?

You guys can flame all you want...but I just don't understand why these people are not free to live the way they wish when this doesn't hurt you in the least...

sP

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

1. Oh, they're free to do it.

I just think it's creepy, and fairly irresponsible.

Which is something I'm free to do.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

11. why is it irresponsible?

what makes it so to want your children to not have sex before marriage?

sP

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

14. ...

"what makes it so to want your children to not have sex before marriage?"

Well, technically I think it's quite irresponsible to marry somebody without having sex with them first.

But I was referring to sex education. I doubt these parents are providing their kids with proper sex ed.

In fact, I'll bet these girls' rates of STDs and unwanted pregnancies are higher than the national average.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

33. i would agree with some of that

the 'head in the sand approach' to sex-ed is dangerous to say the least.

sP

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

34. And this is "head in the sand" to the extreme.

Because now the daughter's not going to want to approach her parents about having sex.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

40. well, I hope not

I don't know these people nor 100% of what they believe. Do you believe it is possible to teach your children that waiting for marriage is the best thing (whether you believe it or not) while keeping the lines of communication open? We're planning teaching that abstinence is best with emphasis on the part that says you can talk to us safely about anything. Don't know if it will work...but we plan to try.

sP

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

43. ...

"Do you believe it is possible to teach your children that waiting for marriage is the best thing (whether you believe it or not) while keeping the lines of communication open?"

No.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

46. could you expand your answer a little?

are you a parent? do you have experience in this? i don't...our daughters are far to young to really think about how to approach sex-ed. i know we will have to and i know what we would like them to believe. i would like them to trust that they can talk to us no matter what. why do you feel it cannot be done? my parents did a good job with me in that regard and i made my decisions and they supported me through them...but i cannot recall how we got there...and now i cannot speak to them about it.

sP

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

49. Am I a parent?

I'm a great grandparent.

I had premarital sex. My wife had premarital sex. My kids had premarital sex. My grandkids had premarital sex. 99% of everybody has premarital sex. And I think asking and expecting it of ones kids is hypocritical, dishonest, and foolish.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

53. ok...

i never said 'expect'. i said we want to teach them that it is best (as my wife and i believe it is) to wait. we wish we had waited. expecting anything from children is a bit foolish, but we still want certain things for them.

sP

[Warpy]

2. The decision may be a personal one

but pledging your hymen to your daddy in a fake marriage ceremony is just plain creepy.

Decisions about sex (or the lack of it) should be personal and PRIVATE.

Trying to turn it into some sort of movement is silly at best, nauseatingly dangerous at worst.

[JuniperLea]

12. What about tribes in Africa that publicly make decisions about sex

That creepy too? I remember the old National Geographic films on this very subject... dancing through the streets with giant phallic gords... dancing around the huts of the womenfolk... thrusting the phallic symbol into the slit of the women's huts... I thought that was creepy too. Until my dad so brilliantly pointed out that MY PERSPECTIVE was far different from that of the people participating in this ancient ceremony.

I remember my great-grandmother talking about her chivaree and the pillow she was to bleed on... talk about creepy! But she was proud of the fact that her husband didn't have to cut his own hand to bleed on the pillow...

http://showcase.netins.net/web/glkfamily2/page9.html

[Warpy]

37. What about them?

My guess is that those public decisions get ignored as thoroughly as 2000 years of Christian proscription against sex for anything but joyless reproduction.

Anyone who attempts to control another person's sexuality is doomed to fail.

[JuniperLea]

58. "Anyone who attempts to control another person's sexuality is doomed to fail"

In our society, yes. You have no idea how things play out in other cultures.

"My guess is that those public decisions get ignored"

Since you have no idea what that society is all about, I think your guess is easily way off base.

In our society, things are a certain way and "guessing" is allowed since you were born into and have lived your life in said society. Your sentiments could easily be condemned as blasphemy to another society.

Not all cultures are like ours.

[Warpy]

64. Human nature certainly is

[JuniperLea]

70. some aspects of "human nature" could certainly be transcended

and should be

[depakid]

30. Well said

You can also bet that these young women are not getting honest sex education- and don't have access to birth control. The result will be that a higher percentage of them will end up with unwanted pregnancies or STD's.

[yardwork]

3. For me, the ceremonies sound very close to incest

The photos of girls cuddling with their fathers, the signing of "purity contracts," the whole idea of a girl "promising" her FATHER (rather than her father and mother, or her extended family, or her God) that she won't have sex until he "gives her away" to her husband, sounds like the father is being given the rights to his daughter's body. That's what bothers me about it.

Child sexual abuse by parents is a very real problem. I've known women who suffered from this.

[Mandate My Ass]

8. Ewww

It's utterly creepy even without the incest angle (which is strongly suggested here IMHO) but the sexual double standard is also glaring. The hyman as a commodity to be passed from daddy to whichever male claims it for himself with a ring to replace daddy's is demeaning to women.

[JuniperLea]

19. That's a stretch!

Have you also personally known any girls who have been through this ceremony?

One man's creepy is another man's... whatever.

Live and let live I always say. I see nothing sexual about a little girl being cuddled by her father! That is disgusting. I'd wash my mind out with soap for having such sick thoughts.

[yardwork]

59. Unfortunately, my mind is already filled with the life stories of women abused

by their fathers. The elderly woman who can't sleep through the night because she has nightmares of her father raping her in the middle of the nights when she was five. The young mother whose father has used her as his sexual slave (with her mother's knowledge and tacit approval) since she was a teenager. And on and on...

[JuniperLea]

65. I know those stories

And I have a few of my own. I try my best NOT to let it taint my feelings about what other people should or should not do. It's a horrible thing to live through such treatment, but the true horror lies in allowing it to screw with your thoughts for the rest of your life.

I still cuddle up with my 22-year-old daughter to watch movies... we've always cuddled, since day one. Now I hear that is considered perverted... I think it perverted for someone to think such a thing.

[yardwork]

78. I don't see any posts equating cuddling with incest

If you read the posts carefully, you will see that many of us are saying that the *entire* ceremony reminds us of incest, not the cuddling alone.

[JuniperLea]

90. Read your own post #3 here...

I find it creepy that anyone would mention cuddling as a sign of anything except love for a child.

[entanglement]

66. I can't for the life of me see what this ceremony has to do with incest

Yes, I find it odd and overly religious, somewhat backward, perhaps. I appreciate the feminist perspective that the underlying 'ownership' idea is offensive. But equating cuddling with incest is extreme, IMHO. By the same token, do you see bestiality when people hug their pets? Reading sexual misconduct in every innocent relationship does nothing to prevent real abuse, which happens in ALL kinds of families to girls AND boys.

[JuniperLea]

4. Good God! Not again...

This old tired crap gets trotted out ever so often. I got into quite the argument.

There seems to be far too many self-professed liberals who will fight for their own right to self-expression, free speech, etc., but God forbid someone else should have a different opinion. There seems to be no live and let live left in the left. Pity that. Because I say live and let live.

[Fresh_Start]

5. they are obvious free to do it

but its extremely creepy and reeks of misogyny and double standard. Why are the girls mothers excluded? Why are the sons ignored?

I'd like to see those men promising that their sons virginity would be protected. But those same creeps are actively encouraging their sons wild oats.

[Skidmore]

6. I'm a mother of a daughter and a grandmother of 2 little girls.

I know how important protecting your children is to a parent. I find this ceremony more than a little creepy. It has sexual overtones itself by using the symbols related to marriage to say something about the relationship between a father and his daughter. I felt a bit nauseated as I read that article. As a young girl, I was repeatedly raped by my father over several years. I also have some knowledge about how much girls are molested in this culture and how much is hidden. Sorry, but you can protect your babies and do it without ceremony.

[yardwork]

60. I'm very sorry about what happened to you, Skidmore

Thank you for speaking about it on a public board. Talking openly about this crime is the only way to stop it.

[BurtWorm]

7. It doesn't strike you as perverse for girls to pledge themselves to their father?

It's a kind of wedding ceremony, isn't it? It's all about the girls pledging obedience to the will of the male parent. As bornagainhooligan said, it's creepy.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

18. while I do find the whole ceremony part a little strange

Christian dogma does have the father as the head of the household and the spiritual as well as physical protector of his daughter until she weds. This isn't a pledge so much to Daddy (which as a standalone would be 'creepy') but it is a pledge to follow the teaching of the church and remain under your father's protection.

I can see the weird aspect of it...but it is just strange to see so much vitriol on the other posting...

Thanks for your two cents!

sP

[MadHound]

9. Sorry, but Freud would have a heyday with these little ceremonies

And quite frankly, they creep me out in a major way. Having a girl, prepubescent into their twenties, essentially promising control of their vaginas to their father in a formal affair, complete with cuddling, snuggling and an exchange of rings just sets off way too many bells in my head that scream out all about abuse and incest.

I frankly don't care what these girls do with their body, it is their body though, not their father's. This sort of pledge, especially with the attendant ceremonies is just a bit beyond that. Just my opinion.

[LizW]

10. They're free

They can do all the ceremonies they want and teach their daughters anything they want. The thread you reference was just pointing out the creepiness of the "ownership" aspect of the ceremony. Just because we criticize something doesn't mean we think it should be outlawed.

I do have a real problem with people who hold the same beliefs as the fathers depicted in the article trying to force their choices regarding sex education on my famiy through the public schools. My choices for educating my children about sex, reproduction and marriage are very close to yours. But I have to worry that my children will get misinformation about sex, reproduction and stds in school because of the abstinence-only policy that special interests have put into place.

[hedgehog]

13. My all girls high school used to have father -daughter dances

back in the 70's and I thought those were creepy. I'm not even wild about father-daughter dances at weddings. It must be tied to whatever the family culture is. In my family, Mom and Dad were the couple and us kids were the kids. Our father was there to protect us, alright, but as a father, not a pseudo-boy friend. I know other people don't think of it that way.

[tjwash]

15. We already had a major freakin' meltdown here 6 months ago on this very subject.

Do we really need to revisit this?

[ProdigalJunkMail]

20. sure...why not? people have repeated meltdowns here all the time...

why should my meltdown be any less worthy than others? :-)

sP

[JuniperLea]

22. Seems more like every other month to me!

Same players too... I think someone has issues they need to keep to themselves.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

56. well, this is my first forray into this discussion

so, please forgive me that I have not been all over this before...I can't read DU daily :-)

sP

[gratuitous]

16. Depends on what you mean

From my reading of these purity ceremonies, there is a very heavy component of a man's ownership of his daughter, which he will cede to the right man when he comes along. I hope, ProdigalJunkMail, you're raising your daughters to be safe, smart and strong in themselves, without having to seek validation of their identity through their relationship to a man. (As an aside, certainly boys are not taught to value themselves only insofar as they please their mothers and then their wives, "saving" themselves for the right woman to come along and take over mother's role in their development and nurture.)

My question is, how long does this pledge last? Until age 18? Age 21? Age 25 or 30? Until death? What if Mr. Right gets stuck in traffic and doesn't come along for years and years? There is indeed something more than a little creepy about these purity balls and the open-ended expectations they imprint on young women.

[Der Blaue Engel]

17. I'm not going to flame you

I'm just going to step away from you very slowly and then run screaming.

Misguided ideas about purity are one thing, but this ceremony is creepfest. Thanks for the heads-up.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

23. ok...well, if you can stand being close for a couple more seconds

what is misguided about it? I can see the creepiness of the ceremony...but what about the purity issue?

sP

[Der Blaue Engel]

32. I think the idea of purity itself is misguided

It implies its opposite, impurity, which I reject.

If one wishes to remain celibate until marriage, that's certainly their prerogative and I wouldn't criticize anyone for that idea alone, but the implication that a girl's virginity belongs to her father creeps me out to no end.

edited for spelling error

[ProdigalJunkMail]

36. ok...i can see your point of view on that

but some Christians believe that there IS impurity. Is it wrong for them to instill that in their children? And while I have never and will never attend one of these sorts of ceremonies, it would seem that they are pledging to live by a family structure that has the father as the protector of the daughter, not as the owner. That would be consistent with the biblical family model.

sP

[gratuitous]

45. Oops

You might consider amending your statement to "some" Christians believe one thing or another, and that the beliefs of those Christians are consistent with a certain reading of a biblical family model. After all, the Bible details several family models, including Solomon, who is reputed to have had 1,000 wives. I also don't think that David's model for the family is quite what you have in mind either, when you cite "the" biblical family model. But those models are every bit as biblical as what you may have in mind.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

48. fine...some :-)

i figured that was understood as there is no sect of Christianity that is 100% for anything...

sP

[Der Blaue Engel]

52. Yes, I think it is wrong to instill that in children

Whether it is from a Christian or a Muslim or a Scientologist. There are Christians who do not use sexist concepts like impurity to refer to a woman's sexuality. It is a loaded term that implies that a girl can be "ruined" or "dirtied" (yet somehow males are exempt).

You don't need to abandon the Christian faith to raise daughters and sons with healthy ideas of their own bodies, sexuality, and self-worth as human beings.

[Matariki]

57. or belongs to their husbands for that matter

where are we - saudi arabia? the 14th century? ugh.

[Der Blaue Engel]

87. yup

I'll see your ugh and raise it a :puke:

[Lautremont]

21. Which hypocrisy are you referring to?

I ask because there's none specifically referenced in your post, unless you're implying that the people who consider this ceremony creepy are hypocrites... but why? Are there other, similar ceremonies to which they've given their hearty approval?

Anyway, I don't think anyone's advocated that the army should be called in to halt the things. They (and I) just think it's a creepy power-play by the patriarchy.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

25. the hipocrisy that I see is

the "people are allowed to believe anything they want as long as it doesn't conflict with 'my' opinion or belief" attitude that some people seem to have. If it falls outside of their worldview it is creepy and wrong wrong wrong. Go back and see the hate in the previous thread. Some people here obviously HATE what is being taught here in addition to HOW is it being taught.

sP

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

27. Is there anybody in that thread...

saying those nuts shouldn't be allowed to do it?

[ProdigalJunkMail]

54. nope...they don't care to see it stopped

but the hipocrisy is that some personal decisions here are ok and some are not ... it is ok to teach sex ed ... but it is not ok to teach that it is best to wait. that is the hipocrisy. one world-view is ok ... one is not ...

sP

[Matariki]

98. There is NO hypocrisy in supporting free speech while simultaneously criticizing that speech

I support the KKK's or some dumbass neo-nazi's right to free speech and Right to have a parade - but damn straight I'm going to criticize the hate that they spew. That's not hypocrisy.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

100. but this group is not teaching hate

nor anything close to it. It might be a little (or a lot) warped to you...but it sure isn't hate.

sP

[Matariki]

104. I'm not saying they are

I was giving an extreme example for the sake of clarity. Maybe that wasn't the best approach.

It's not hypocritical to support someone's right to free speech, or the right to teach their beliefs to their kids, while at the same time criticizing those beliefs. I think what those people are doing is both creepy AND an unrealistic. But if someone tried to pass a law to stop them from having their dumb balls or pledges, I'd be right there in their support to free speech (but NOT support of their message) - as I'm sure many people on this board would be. Does that make sense?

[ProdigalJunkMail]

107. I can dig that...

I guess I was floored by the venom that I saw. I don't have a problem with terms like creepy and unrealistic...I find that both of those could easily be applied to this practice (I find it odd myself). However, there are some people on that other thread that obviously hate the whole idea...and I do mean hate.

Thanks for your input and clarification. I am actually quite pleased at the calm discourse in this thread.

sP

[seabeyond]

24. this ritual asks a girl to pledge her virginity to her father for him to hand to her husband

if you cannot see the offense there, then probably nothing anyone says will matter to you. femalehood is NOt all about our virginity. our worth is NOT about our virginity. and our virginity is NOT our fathers to hand to our husband.

firstly

also there are girls very young doing this. i have raised two children. there is not even a concept of sex at these ages, some of these girls are asked to be thinking about it. it is taking a child to a place before they are ready to go, for the peace of mind for a parent. for me that is selfish parenting

of course i respect anothers ability to raise their own children as they see fit. i will stand behind the right for these people to be able to practice this. just as i will stand behind a parents right to spank their children. spare the rod spoil the child, though i know it is not the most effective way parenting

i spent about 8 yrs in a private christian school and watched how this group addressed sexuality with their teens. it was all about fear and the children being out of control. there was a lot of dishonesty and staying away from truth to get child brainwashed to make the choices we adults did not do when we were young. it has never made sense to me for a parent to expect different from their children from what we did. but again, it is a parents right to do

lastly..... i didnt get married until 32. i wasnt ready. i had my own mess ups to take care of before committing. i didnt find a man i wanted or was willing to commit to. i didnt settle. and here i am in the easiest most respectful marriage that is strong and enduring, because i didnt settle. i think it is unrealistic to expect me to wait until i was 32 to have sex. i also would hate for my child to marry at 18 cause they wanted sex.

[Pithlet]

26. Well said, seabeyond.

Excellent points, all.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

28. ok...some questions and points

1) You're right...this is not about femalehood...it is about religious belief and family structure...ceremony is a little weird but the belief (weird or not) is what they hold to

2) i agree on the young girl part...

3) fear is the LAST way you should try to teach a child to abstain from sex...I am right there with you on that. Give them all they need to know and all they want to know...give them the information to make that decision and HELP them make it if need be.

Thanks for your two cents. My wife and I got married late in life too thanks to OUR issues. Strangely enough though, we wish we had waited for each other.

sP

[Marr]

39. Very well put.

I also think the whole thing has an oddly incestuous smell to it, the way that child beauty pageants seem so geared to the pedophile.

But even if that weren't the case, the problem you describe is enough to make me think this "ceremony" is disgusting.

[rpgamerd00d]

29. "My belief structure holds that sex outside of marriage is not something that was intended for us. "

Really?

What did man do for the 10's of thousands of years before religion and marriage existed?

Sorry, that was just a moronic and ridiculous statement.

I have no problem with you believing that saving sex for marriage is special, or important, or a rule of your Faith, or any of that.
But claiming that it is part of human evolution/physiology is just .... stupid.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

31. no...my religios preference is no more ridiculous than yours

as as you don't know the totality of that belief structure your comment is pretty much insulting (as I guess it was meant to be).

sP

[rpgamerd00d]

38. Its a simple matter of science.

Human beings existed far longer than religion. Therefore, human beings copulated and procreated for generations upon generations without the institution of "marriage". Therefore, "My belief structure holds that sex outside of marriage is not something that was intended for us" is a nonsensical, ludicrous, and flatly stupid statement.

Its not insulting, its merely factual.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

41. once again...you don't know my beliefs

and therefor are simply calling me stupid. Oh well...

sP

[Odin2005]

68. People are entitled to their own opinions.They are not entitled to their own "facts."

RPG Gamer is correct. Marriage as the term is commonly used did not exist until settled societies arose. That is not to say hunter-gatherers didn't have predominantly monogamous relationships, but those relationships were not "institutionalized" as they are in settled societies.

[rpgamerd00d]

69. Your beliefs have nothing to do with it.

I am not "calling you stupid" as an insult.

I am using the literal definition of the word "stupid".

Its not scientifically possible for human reproduction to be meant to be done within marriage since human reproduction pre-dates marriage.
To claim this is stupid, in the literal, dictionary definition sense of the word.

Again, I'm not saying its "stupid because I disagree". I am saying its stupid because its "Marked by a lack of intelligence or care; characterized by or proceeding from mental dullness; foolish; senseless".

[ProdigalJunkMail]

71. well, my beliefs on the 'beginning' of humanity

may surprise you. i do not doubt that before a certain point marriage did not exist. i believe it was ordained at a point in history and at that point the rules applied, not before. So, having that bit of info, does your opinion change?

sP

[rpgamerd00d]

73. Of course not. Why would it?

Its clear to me that scientifically, humans can reproduce out of wedlock. Its also clear to me that humans were meant to reproduce out of wedlock, because:
a) we reproduced before there was even such a thing as marriage
b) marriage was introduced by Man
c) we continue to be able to reproduce without marriage
d) marriage is not universal (different in different religions)

Therefore, the only rational, logical conclusion anyone can come to is that marriage is not a factor in human reproduction, and never has been.

Again, this has nothing to do with your beliefs. Its pure, scientific fact.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

75. well, see, certain religions would take issue with some of your

posits.

a) absolutely true...
b) Christians, Jews, Muslims see marriage as instituted by God
c) now it is not the plan according to b)
d) see c)

See, it is about religious belief in what the origins of marriage happen to be. I can appreciate that you don't believe that God institued marriage or that God even exists. That's cool by me. But, my religous beliefs hold that as God instituted marriage and describes it though the bible in a certain manner, that sexual activity (which is the only current way to reproduce humans barring cloning in the near future) outside of that marriage is not according to plan.

So, while what you say may be fact, it does not mean that I believe it is the way it should be. From the moment God instituted marriage, then that was the framework in which families would be made. THAT is a religious belief.

It is a fact that we have troops on the ground in Iraq...but that is not how it should be.

sP

[rpgamerd00d]

77. Thats fine. All I ask is for you to choose your words correctly.

Simply say "I believe God intends us to be married prior to reproduction."

Don't phrase it in a scientific or evolutionary context, and I think we'll all be happy.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

79. I didn't put the timestamp on it

:-(

"My belief structure holds that sex outside of marriage is not something that was intended for us." That statement was intended to speak to my wife and our family but in a broader context Christians in general...which the people this article talks about seem to be. You are the one that put the eternal time-stamp on it. I am not ignorant of the biological and geological past, though I can see you might think that given some of the things that certain fundamentalists would have us all believe.

sP

OnEdit : the poster never called ME stupid, just the statement and they way it was read...sorry about that...

[Lautremont]

93. It appears to me that your beliefs are very specific, and very much

outside of more common belief systems both on DU and in the wider world. (I'm not saying this is bad, just fact.) Given that, I do wonder why the general reaction to the thread you linked to in your OP was such a surprise.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

97. the surprise is this

it is ok to hate someone for their beliefs, but it is not ok to hate me for mine. Many people get so mad here when someone expresses disdain for their beliefs be they political, religious or whatever. Yet, they feel comfortable using the most harsh language possible to describe someone else's beliefs. That is all.

sP

[Marr]

35. The specifics of the "ceremony" have strong shades of sexual abuse, IMHO.

It has incestuous overtones.

[GeorgeGist]

42. It might be meaningful...

if society had the power to create a marriage before claiming that it alone has the right to define one.

[sinkingfeeling]

44. There is a big difference between hatred and disgust. I read all of the

above comments and some are disgusted (indicated by the use of 'creepy' over and over), but see no one saying that the people involved in the 'ceremony' should be 'stopped', 'killed', or that the rite should be 'outlawed'. Commentors seem to express aversion, distaste, loathing, nausea, repugnance, repulsion, revulsion to the ceremony, but not hate.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

50. you don't have to want something outlawed

to hate it...

sP

[LeftishBrit]

47. I think what's particularly creepy is that the girls are being asked to pledge virginity

specifically to their FATHERS. If it was to their mothers, or both parents, I would still think it unrealistic and likely to be counterproductive; but I wouldn't regard it as creepy.

Also why aren't sons being included in these ceremonies? After all, boys and men have sex too! The whole specific father-daughter aspect of it strikes me as a bit emotionally incestuous.

'these girls are old enough to make the decision to have sex but somehow NOT old enough to make the decision to not have sex'

Actually, one main point is that some of them didn't seem old enough to make either decision. Some of the ceremonies involved girls as young as 7, and IIRC in at least one such case the girl's 4-year-old sister also ended up being included in it. Maybe I'm prudish, but I don't think very small girls should be encouraged to imagine sex for themselves, either as a good thing or a bad thing. They're not ready at 7.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

51. i definitely agree on the very young being excluded

from these sorts of things...

sP

[Matariki]

55. I feel sorry for your kids.

is that flaming?

wouldn't you rather your daughters have a happy sex life with their spouses? if they don't have sex before marriage won't it just be a luck of the draw? suppose the person they marry turns out to be sexually incompatible with them, or simply bad at sex and unwilling to learn? years of misery for them is fine for them, as long as it doesn't offend your ideology?

sorry if my questions are harsh, but i think they're worth thinking about.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

62. no, your questions aren't harsh at all

and they are a concern. However, if two people love each other and can talk, sex can be good (heck great) even without the luck of the draw. My fear is for what happened to my wife and to myself to some degree: sexual encounters that turn out to be nothing more than sex that end up hurting us emotionally. My wife was tormented by her first sexual encounters. Someone who did not love her. Someone who would not care to learn about her and what made her happy and satisfied. Someone she thought she loved...and who swore he loved her...and in the end was just in it for the sex...which he apparently enjoyed.

sP

[Matariki]

67. Thanks for not taking my questions as hostile

I understand what you are saying but I've seen scenarios like that happen after 25 years of marriage too. My own parents in fact. Of course you want to, but you can never completely protect your children from getting hurt. Staying a virgin until marriage is NOT a guarantee a person isn't gonna get hurt. I've known people who have done that (married their high school sweetheart and ONLY sex partner) and its often ended badly. Often because they end up feeling they missed out on something - or at least not knowing if they have or not.

You do your children better service by being realistic with then. By teaching them the sort of self respect and self reliance that prevents people from taking advantage of them and helps them heal should someone hurt them in a relationship.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

72. i guess this is where we differ from certain folks

we would like them to have the same beliefs we do. That waiting until marriage is what is desired by our God (and us) but that whatever comes...comes and that we will love you no matter what. We will teach our children whatever they want to know. We will teach them that they can talk to us and trust us. I know there is no way to guarantee that hurt will not enter the picture...but mitigating that possibilty would seem to be one of my jobs as 'dad'.

Thanks for the comments...
sP

[Karenina]

96. Projection.

Your experiences cannot in any way, shape or form be a template for your daughters. They are living in a different world than the one those of us born in the last century inhabited. Those who are attempting to cement their neuroses into their daughters' minds via these very questionable "ceremonies" will reap what they have sown.

Better to teach one's daughters self-respect, sovereignty over their own bodies and arm them with the biological facts and social values that will allow THEM to make well-informed decisions. You may have yet to learn that in the final analysis, you cannot control your children. You can offer them the tools to control THEMSELVES, but whether they do so or not is OUT OF YOUR CONTROL.

I find your story of your wife and you "wishing you had waited" somewhat disturbing. I came of age in the rough and tumble 60's in a large metropolitan area and as such had MANY sexual partners. I can look back at some encounters and wonder "WHAT was I thinking?" but at the same time those experiences taught me a LOT about MEN and my relationship to them. I would not waste a minute regretting something I can never change.

Indeed, I and many of my contemporaries had "F***ing Buddies." (I don't want to offend you with my language :hug:). 40 years later I recall mine fondly. No big romance, we weren't each other's "types," he was just someone I genuinely liked as a human being who felt the same about me. We argued politics, sports, drank beer and occasionally slept in each other's dorm rooms, sometimes sex, sometimes not. It was VERY RELAXED. (Of course this was during that small window of time where sex could be indulged without the terror of pregnancy or death).

Why project the past to which you're clinging onto your daughters? That somehow had you and your wife "waited" something would be different? If the two of you had not had your prior experiences YOU MIGHT HAVE NOT HAD THE PSYCHIC TOOLS TO EVEN RECOGNIZE EACH OTHER.

Anyway, I hope my little entry has not offended your sensibilities.

[dddem]

103. With all due respect,

Your Wife's experiences ( as all of our experiences) are what brought her to where she is today. The two of you couldn't possibly know how perfect you are for each other unless you have experienced imperfection. We have to learn to embrace our past expereinces as lessons to help us grow, and stop considering them nothing but regrets. As I try to tell my kids, you can't possibly appreciate how good it is to feel good, unless you've felt terrible once in a while.
You and your wife should never regret the road that led you to each other. It's highly likely that without the experiences you each brought into your relationship, it might never have turned out the way it did!
Peace.

[countingbluecars]

61. Guilt, guilt, guilt!

Pity the poor girl who can't live up to this contract with her father. I guess daddy can always disown her for breach of contract.

[Odin2005]

63. I think teens should wait untill they are in a "steady" relationship, but waiting untill marrige...

...is BS based on patriarchal obsessions over virginity.

I have no problem with pre-marital sex. I DO have a problem with "casual" sex, that is, bonking some random guy or gal.

[newportdadde]

74. I have 3 sons. My take - Wait until you can afford to support a child on your dime.

Yeah yeah I know, that can take forever and seems harsh. Until that time comes then my advice is to enjoy the oral sex because after you get married you can kiss it goodbye anyways :shrug:.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

76. ok...the first person that I agree with 100%

:-)

Just kidding but I appreciate the laugh!

sP

[Marie26]

80. It hurts their kids.

Why can't people practice child abuse when it doesn't hurt you in the slightest? Live & let live, right? No.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

81. what hurts them?

the freaky ceremony or the teaching of the belief that waiting until marriage is the right thing according to their chosen religion?

sP

[Marie26]

83. The freaky ceremony

The instillation of a belief that virginity is all that matters for a woman, and she will be judged, condemned, or lauded for that alone.

The reaffirment of a patriarchical society, in which men have control over women's sexuality.

The symbolic loss of a woman's control over her own body to a father (ick), who will eventually hand the keys over to a husband. Total patriarchical view of women - as property, as chattel.

The disempowerment of girls, teaching them at a young age that they must give up decisions to a strong "father figure." This whole ceremony is an exercise in dependence and control.

The fact that NONE OF THIS WILL WORK!

[ProdigalJunkMail]

84. the big problem I have with it is one that many here have mentioned

what happens when little Suzy fails to live up to her pledge? Is she 'less' because of that? I would never ask my daughters to pledge anything other than that they would use their heads as well as their hearts when making the decision to have sex...the first time or any time.

sP

[Marie26]

85. That's wise

IMO, guilt is exactly the point of this whole spectacle. They're trying to instill a feeling of guilt & shame in girls who have premarital sex. It's just messed up in the extreme.

[NoSheep]

89. Exactly. What if she gets older and decides not to marry? It's just

another way of making women feel guilty about having sex. And why are they having this big public ceremony over it? Unwise I say. A girl may make this decision...to promise her parents she will wait. That's okay. But what if she doesn't? It just seems to be a lot of unnecessary pressure. Why not mom and dad instead of just dad? Creepy.

[riderinthestorm]

105. Not to mention the deeply flawed "abstinence only" programs these kids attend

which don't work, providing such minimal sex ed information as to really jeopardize their physical health.

[Bronyraurus]

82. It's just gross

to see young girls telling their fathers what they will or will not do with their private parts. When I'm a father, I am going to instill my values into my children, enforce my rules in my household, and not concern myself with the day-to-day doings of my childrens' genitalia.

YUCK!

[riderinthestorm]

86. I taught my children to honor their promises. This "promise" is virtually guaranteed to be broken.

Is that the lesson you really want to impart to your kids? To have your children make this huge promise that WILL be broken, and which ensures that your children WILL never speak to you about sex since they now have double the "shame" of sex AND breaking the promise.

Sorry, clearly my values are different than yours. I see pre-marital sex as unimportant in the scheme of principles I want my children to learn. Keeping their word, honoring their promises, living up to their end of a bargain/contract/deal - hands down this takes precedence. Especially when it comes to sex, that is a promise that will be broken. I can (and did) suggest they wait for sex but I would never try to bind them with some silly bargain that is guaranteed to fail.

Choose your battles wisely.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

88. well, I think you might have missed something I said

I never said anything about my children promising anything and that we would empasize love and acceptance of them no matter what they decided to do. We would attempt to instill Christian teaching in them, while explaining that we didn't live up to it either. We don't believe sex is shameful or dirty or any of the words with which some Christians my label it.

sP

[riderinthestorm]

92. Your whole OP leads one to believe you don't find anything wrong with this

"Is it not ok for people to believe that way?"
It is extremely problematic since it's troubling on many levels from the moral to the incestuous.

"Is it not ok for them to have their little ceremony, that will likely mean nothing if the beliefs aren't really strong or when the hormones get going like there is no tomorrow?"
No, I don't see it as okay. It's teaching them to not honor their promises and guaranteeing these girls will feel shame about sex as well as the incestuous overtones.

"Why the venom?"
Cause it's wrong.

"You guys can flame all you want...but I just don't understand why these people are not free to live the way they wish when this doesn't hurt you in the least..."
It does hurt all of us - the problems from this mindset permeate our culture in so many ways from the lack of proper sex education that's a hallmark of these religious circles (which leads to increased STDs and unwanted pregnancies) to the persistent fear and shame about sex pervading our society just to name a few.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

94. i find them doing their thing

and it hurts no one on this board so why do people get so up in arms about it? One set of beliefs is ok...one is not. I do not like what these people are doing. I would never do this for my children. These people believe that they have a mandate from God to stay virgins until marriage. The fathers likely believe that they are the protectors of their families and putting that into practice. You don't know if this is precluding other sex ed. I will teach my children my beliefs and you would teach your children your beliefs. Would they be right to hate you for your beliefs? Would they be right to hate your beliefs?

sP

[riderinthestorm]

99. This is a practice that hurts us all

our culture and society are harmed by this kind of extremism. The consequences of ceremonies like this, with all their terrible messages about sex and gender roles to name a couple of problematic areas, aren't limited to just their circle. iI's harmful effects spill over into the greater society at large (and more than a few DUers have firsthand knowledge of some of the harm, I'm sure).

And I am dead cert they hate me for my "beliefs" since I believe girls/women should never be subjugated "under" their fathers, that sex should never be bargained with, that this type of ceremony raises extremely disturbing incestuous implications and that fundies can't or won't see....

Are they "right" to hate "my" beliefs? What a wierd question. I'm not sure what kind of answer you're looking for with this. My beliefs revolve around gender equality, education, self-esteem and self-respect about sex, honoring promises etc. - these should be societal values shared by all Americans - should they "hate" these beliefs?

[NoSheep]

91. "Live and let live"? I wonder what a child psychologist would say.

Looks like Live and let abuse.

[kineneb]

95. the whole issue of pre-marital "purity" is primitive

It dates from a time when the mechanisms of biology were poorly understood. It was important to males in those societies to assure the paternity of any children. Hence women's sexuality was controlled, from birth to menopause (assuming they lived that long). Now that there is DNA testing, the whole issue should be considered moot.

As far as those ceremonies, they should be seen as the last remnants of a tribal patriarchy that has become toxic in the modern world. A girl's sexuality belongs to her alone. And once she reaches 18, what she does is truly her own business.

[MrSlayer]

101. I'm completely indifferent to the whole thing.

I don't really care what other people do as long as they aren't bothering me. If families want to have "virginity pledges" go right ahead, if you want to have leather and rubber parties soaked in cooking oil I don't care. Just don't bother me about it or try to force it on me. Live and let live.

[Arugula Latte]

102. I do reserve the right to make judgments of other people's behavior.

This whole ceremony thing is sexist and abusive, and I have no reservations about saying so.

I do think it's incredibly naive and silly to base life judgments on what some invisible deity in the sky (non-existant, at that, IMO) "thinks" about you. Other people believe I will burn in a place with demons and pitchforks just for thinking that. So be it. They can say that, and I can state my opinion.

As an aside, if my kids (I have one of each gender) ever come to me when they're older and tell me they've decided to "wait" until marriage, I will tell them in no uncertain terms that they're free to make their own decisions, but that I personally think that is a huge mistake. Huge.

In fact, I am going to encourage my children to date, get to know, be friends with, etc. many, many other people before marriage (not "sleeping around," though having sex with a handful of people before marriage is definitely wise, I think). There's nothing worse than getting sucked into a huge commitment like marriage without having a good understanding of what makes a good mate -- not JUST sex, but including sex, as well as the way you like to be treated, expectations for the relationship, financial views, religious views, etc. etc.

[Name removed]

106. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

108. wow...you just don't get it do you

my family holds to a view that is based in our religion...i never mentioned controlling anyone...i was talking about teaching the traditions of our religion and what we would hope for them ... but hey, you don't have to read ... just make up stuff as you go.

"No Dad in the universe has persuaded his teenage daughter to exercise self-control." What an innane thing to say. To believe that parents have no influence over their children's actions is a purely uninformed view.

sP