I am totally with you on this one, Jessica, as usual. Not only that but the photo TOTALLY creeps me out. And I am probably a creep to most of the people on this blog. VOTE DEMOCRATIC...your misogynist-feminist pal, CNBC Sucks

As I read this, I finally put together what bothers me the most about these articles on purity balls: they all make it so clear that these balls are not about fathers and daughters, but about the publicity opportunities for the purity "cause". The paragraph about the number of photographers and the BBC recording this "private decision" between father and daughter make it clear that this totally transcends personal decision and becomes societal.

I am continuously baffled by people who insist on separating these events from the "memories" they're making. "Purity Ball" is not a cover story for "daddy/daughter picnic." This event has a very clear agenda and it's not just quality time.

I've often wondered with these lock/key types, if the daughter decides to marry someone whom the father does not approve, is there ever an uncomfortable talk where he refuses to give up his daughter's virginity?

So when are we going to get the purity
balls for boys and their mothers? Or
Fathers and their sons?

You know they are doing all the work on the
girls, where is the pressure on the boys?

I mean really, this purity thing should
extend to the boys. Maybe a father son
wrestling match.

You know how sometimes the people who are
insisting most about something like "purity"
are the ones who are the LEAST "pure"?

Think about Dr. Laura talking about the
importance of staying married. (She's
divorced).
Children honoring their
parents (Her mom died alone and rotted
in a condo for months until someone found her),
No sex before marriage (her nude photos
on the net).
The importance of being "Her
Kid's mom" to instill good moral values
in her son, (Her son is a marine with some
sick, sick images and comments on his Myspace page.

Maybe we should look into the backgrounds of the
people who are into these purity balls.
Both the men AND the women. I'm guessing that
they have been abused or psychologically damaged in some fashion that led them to do this.

They should upgrade from bracelets to...I don't know...maybe, like, belts? Around their naughty bits? That would certainly be a modern solution.

But spocko, boys don't have hymens that can be "broken" so they don't have anything "pure" to worry about losing! What that have are "integrity" balls where they're told not to dirty up some other guys potential property cause they wouldn't want someone to do that to their property.

And Gibbs totally misses the point and I'm beginning to wonder when the MSM will ever become objective again.

Purity is certainly a loaded word--but is there anyone who thinks it's a good idea for 12-year-olds to have sex?

It's been brought up but why o' why do people think that all young girls are going to become sex crazed maniacs if they know they have the option to have sex before marriage? Why, when they're making an "example" are the girls always within the pre-teen and early teen range? (like, when do you ever hear, "but is there anyone who thinks it's a good idea for 17-year-olds to have sex?). They use it to scare parents and society. TWELVE YEAR OLDS WILL BE FUCKING IN THE STREETS UNLESS DADDY PUTS A STOP TO IT!

And the covering of the heart? I shuddered. Must women always be protrayed as something that needs to be "protected" And what the fuck are they being protected from? A broken heart? There are many women who can attest that marriage doesn't spare you that.

ZOMG this is frustrating on so many levels.

The first anecdote makes more sense if you replace the word "heart" with "vagina" throughout.

I'm a literal person and don't much care for innuendo!

This write up misses one of the quotes that most demonstrates why I'm so uncomfortable with these purity balls.

"One man is dancing with his younger daughter, wishing his older girl had come as well. She used to wear a purity ring, he says, until a boy she knew assaulted her; she took it off--felt too dirty. Her parents gave her a new one, a bigger one; it took many months and much therapy, her father goes on, before she was able to put a ring on again. 'That was part of a healing process,' he says, 'with the message that you're valuable no matter what someone did to you.'"

When you tell these girls and young women that their value lies in their sexuality - in their "purity" - they view themselves to be damaged goods even in circumstances that they had no control over. It goes beyond sexual assault. If a young woman has a consensual sexual encounter that perhaps she regrets because the circumstances weren't ideal (Note: This is not to say that teenagers can't have positive, informed sexual experiences), she's now "tainted" and can never get back what she lost. Virginity is not a trophy to be passed from father to husband.

One issue in the article that really bothered me, along with everything else, was the discussion of the teen girl who wore a purity ring until someone sexually assaulted her and she felt she could no longer wear the ring. The article then went on to pose the story as if the purity ring then became part of the healing process because her parents gave her another ring which she later started to wear. I would guess that her story is absolutely rare because with all of the victim blaming rampant with sexual assault, it would be unlikely that most parents would not blame HER for the assault, let alone she even tell them in the first place. I imagine that in most cases of sexual assault a girl who took a purity pledge would just be even that much more traumatized and self-blaming because of the unhealthy relationship this sets up with a girl's own body: your body is not yours, but an indicator of your societal worth. Hell, even the article conflated virginity with success for girls.

Also it seems to me that this message of your body not belonging to yourself, but to male figures in your life, would only undermine any sense of personal agency and perhaps even make it more likely for them to be assaulted?

I vote we create something to subvert this trend: anyone up for agency balls? Maybe girls get to dress however they want and come with their parents to a nice dinner with music of their choice and present their own writings, art, and music.. perhaps both parents and daughters alike make pledges to strive for the daughters' senses of personal agency and accomplishment, with the idea that a world of possibilities is open to them.

I really wish the whole world could just give up the concept of virginity already. Abstinence is a very valid choice, but the whole idea of ownership of the daughter's sexuality being "passed on" to a man that her father sees fit is far too reminiscent of sex slavery; it makes me gag to read about it nearly every time.

What has always disturbed me about this issue is the way in which it is defended. Proponents of these virginity balls always site how great it is for fathers to take a proactive role in the lives of their daughters. (This exact defense was used in this article, actually.) But really, these fathers are not taking an interest in their daughters, they are taking an interest in their daughter’s hymens. If they really cared about their daughters, they would raise them to be independent, educated, informed, and (gasp!) pro-choice. Fathers who actually loved their daughters would want, beyond all else, for them to grow up and be respected and empowered women…not to grow up and define herself by their “virginity.” One thing is for sure…you’ll never find me at one of these.

Spocko is right -- anybody this concerned about "purity" has something ugly at work inside them, and that thing motivates many many more people than we'd like to believe.

Sexual/psychological damage pretty much is What's the Matter With Kansas, IMHO. And therefore doing something about it can help us solve tons of seemingly unrelated problems.

This is the same woman who wrote that the girls who made the pregnancy pact needed to get some cred for doing the 'right thing' aka, choosing to become teen mothers and not terminating their pregnancies.

The moral police is all over this article...if this isn't mother-knows-best journalism, TIME magazine is up the denial river.

Thanks Nancy Gibbs for reminding us to just suppress all rational thoughts that might respect girls and women enough to believe they know what's best for them and deserve better than being valued only for the state of the hymen at the time of their marriage....err...the transfer of property.

My favourite part is the not-so-subtle swipe at social science, which makes it sound like unfounded hocus-pocus...Except that social science actually has data to support their "practical objection: The majority of kids who make a virginity pledge, they argue, will still have sex before marriage but are less likely than other kids to use contraception, since that would involve planning ahead for something they have promised not to do. This puts them at risk for sexually transmitted diseases."
Defenders of purity balls, on the other hand, have no such statistics. And if social science is right, there's a decent change they might also have chlamydia.

This makes me feel so uncomfortable.

Much of this has already been said, but I feel moved to repeat it:
1) why focus on girls and not boys?
2) there are many other ways that fathers and daughters can bond without reference to a hymen
3) my idea of crazy-wonderful father-daughter bonding on the subject of sex would involve talking about feelings and choices and the handing over of condoms etc
4) the religious overtones were strange to me.... but I can more easily stomach the idea of a person making a pledge to god with regard to sexual behaviour or abstinence than making a pledge to or with their father about sex
5) I think we have reached a point where women and girls should be the accepted guardians of their own honour, however they wish to define it
6) I'm not all that keen on the father pledging to the daughter (rather than to god, or himself) that he won't use pornography etc either
7) does the father wear a purity ring too? Does he forfeit it if he surfs the net for porn? If he sullies his purity with such sexual behaviour, does he get barred from going the the purity ball next year?

I also had some lexical difficulty with the pledge. The imagery of the father "covering" the daughter's "purity" was unfortunate for me as I kept thinking about how in animal breeding the male "covers" the female when he mates with her. Ick.

Just sent to TIME:

My first reaction when I first heard of these "purity balls" was eeuuww, that is so creepy! And seeing the photo and reading the gushing text from Ms Gibbs reinforced that feeling. I'm a father who managed to raise two daughters in today's world--both of whom are doing quite well, thank you--without once worrying about the state of their "purity," and I think it's borderline pedophilia for these fathers to fetishize their daughter's sexuality in this way. Tell me the difference between the shot of two fathers feeling up their young daughters and the one of Warren Jeffs, the notorious polygamist, planting a not-very-fatherly kiss on a 12-year old. The one of Jeffs was rightly condemned and caused an outcry, but Ms Gibbs views the TIME shot as "A Delicate Dance." Yuck! And for Time to not only embrace it but allow your "objective" reporter to heap praise on this disgusting practice puts you right in the middle of that. These guys are creeps who are one step away from being featured on "To Catch a Predator," and TIME is just enabling that.

Eeuuwww again!

[signed]

rdale

When the economist covered this topic a few years ago they ended with a great line:
"Unless they start doing this with the boys too, the chaste will always be chased."

It drives me insane when people defend these balls by saying "it is good for dads to be involved with their daughters." There is a lot of space between not being involved and attempting to own the daughter's hymen.

The story of the girl who was assaulted almost made me cry, thinking about how she will feel in abstinence only class when the teacher compares non-virgins to used kleenex...

"Unless they start doing this with the boys too, the chaste will always be chased."

Mhm. But let Daddy hold the key - shall we stir up any more phallic imagery? Daddy's held rights to the yonic chamber all along; is it too much of a stretch to consider that this is consequential inaccessibility to one's own private parts? You'd think this would even be mollified by having both parents have a key, but then you remember that Daddy's has to be bigger and Mom just doesn't really know how to yield a fucking tool.

AP, I had a class where someone compared non-virgins to candy that had been chewed up and spat out. "you don't know where it's been! When you marry, would you rather have someone who was touched, or someone untouched?"

This absolutely plays havoc with rape survivors. I am not one, but someone I dearly love is, and this whole "untouched" thing made me sick.

As the father of a pre-teen, I can understand some of the innate and societal pressures that contribute to such a misguided movement.

I love my children and want nothing more than to protect them from all the potential harms which may befall them. Beyond that, my daughter and I are close. She confides in me and looks to me for advice. I understand the protective impulse at play here.

That said, these balls are just creepy. The goal needs to be much broader than just preventing ones daughter from sexual involvement. I want to protect my kids from is getting involved in any unhealthy relationships. This means both teaching them to avoid sexual activity that they are not ready for; that may leave them feeling used or that harm their emotional state and helping them understand what a positive relationship looks and feels like.

Therefore, why would any loving father teach his daughter that this type of patriarchal, sexually controlling behavior is how the men in her world are supposed to act? Even if you are the most upright person, these warped priorities set your daughter to respond in an emotionally positive way to the classic behaviors of some really oppressive guys.

I have seen too many female friends and relatives waste years (and acquire emotional scars) with emotionally controlling, sex obsessed, paranoid men. And I can't help but see this behavior reflected strongly in the purity ball movement. I have to wonder how many of the purity ball girls are going to end up with "every breath you take" as the first dance at their wedding reception.

"When you marry, would you rather have someone who was touched, or someone untouched?"

Bettered, yet, by the machine-to-save-the-world comparison: two minutes left...two machines...care to try the one that you know does work than the one that doesn't?

Of course, it's an absurd premise - but so is the idea that girls (I'm reminded of a Ballardian idea here, where sex, the vagina, is architectural...thus inhabitable and capable of being dilapidated like a car or public/private space) are markedly ruined by fornication.

Yechhh... I grew up Southern Baptist in the 90's, and was of course a "True Love Waits" pledge - glad this particular grossness hadn't taken hold yet. True Love Waits was at least aimed at both sexes, and encouraged people who were not still virgins to pledge abstinence till marriage anyway, that all was forgiven. Yeah, pretty ridiculous, but less psychologically harmful than this crap.

I'm probably more personally "conservative" than most Feministing posters, but given the environment I grew up in and what I saw it do to some of my peers, deeply appreciate what good information and a non-judgmental attitude can do to save young women a lifetime of hurt. My pragmatic German fiance and I plan to be open with our kids, to make sure that they know we won't be upset if they do have sex much younger than we were, and that what we want most for them in all that is not to limit their future possibilities by bad judgment.

Give a girl good reasons not to get pregnant (better possibilities for a bright future) and the tools to make is possible, and sensible behavior will be more likely to follow. I'm sure the drastically lower rates of both teen pregnancy AND teen abortions that Germany and the Netherlands enjoy compared to the US are familiar to you guys and gals.

siobhan said: I really wish the whole world could just give up the concept of virginity already. Abstinence is a very valid choice, but the whole idea of ownership of the daughter's sexuality being "passed on" to a man that her father sees fit is far too reminiscent of sex slavery; it makes me gag to read about it nearly every time.

That is a really interesting question - how can we talk about making informed sexual choices that can include abstinence in a way that doesn't make virginity a thing you "have" or "protect" or "lose" (that always makes me think you could say "I found my virginity! It was behind the couch all along!")

While I think there's nothing wrong with encouraging kids to consider abstinence (this goes for both sexes!) until they're a wee bit older, this idea takes it all the way in the wrong direction.

It's not like they're celebrating virginity as a choice, they're showcasing the "worth" of their daughters by announcing their virginity. This way everyone can know that so-and-so's daughter is worth a dozen cattle and a Lexus (or what have you). If you want her, she's in untouched condition! So, yet again, girls are owned by their daddies until they're relinquished to another man.

Party, party...

Lets suppress your sexual side in a very unhealthy way which is so called "purity." But to me this control, plain and simple.

Everyone who has commented so far has asked about, "what about the boys?" What about a boys purity ball?

The very sad thing is that many of these girls in these purity balls believe that a man will come to them and help them just like their Dads. This is very sad because again this is taking away from the self love factor which is not taught among young girls. When I was 15 years old I clearly remember saying, "I am going to do everything on my own and not rely on man." This led me to get my MA by the time I was 24 years old and now I am in the process of starting a nonprofit. Its about nurture your own garden, loving and celebrating YOU!

"That is a really interesting question - how can we talk about making informed sexual choices that can include abstinence in a way that doesn't make virginity a thing you "have" or "protect" or "lose"

The difficulty, of course, being that abstinence tends to preclude an idea of virginity. I see no problem with imagining a positive scenario where somebody wants to abstinent after having sex...or whereas abstinence takes on a feminist calling, aligning as something sacred to the girl - and not the father. Then again, I can also imagine a fitting scenario where sex is removed as an end-all, a teleology of love, and where sex is simply relegated to just another sexual act and not some historic apogee.

All of these, inevitably, are not adequate corollaries of promise rings and purity balls.

I can so clearly visualize how this went down. Ms. Nancy Gibbs trots over to Colorado Springs, sixth most conservative city in the country, for an evening at the "rich white folks club" (aka The Broadmoor). And my, how impressive everything is! How CLEAN and polite and expensive and--dare I say it?--pure.

It's very easy to buy into the illusion of rich, white, conservative Christians. They have the money to fabricate any fantasy they want, including the idea that Purity Balls are somehow a healthy spiritual practice. They'll even buy themselves some frolicking child ballerinas, just to emphasize how innocent the whole affair is.

So Nancy Gibbs got sucked into the fantasy. It's easy to do, especially if you're a willing participant. After all, the world of choices and autonomy is such an ugly, scary place--it's much easier to pretend that right and wrong fall on either side of a clearly drawn line, that Jesus was white, and at the end of the day, money buys happiness.

I read this article today. I thought the photo you've got on the page here is totally creepy.

I subscribe to Time and the first thing I saw when I flipped it open was this article. Naturally I sped through it and began to formulate a letter-to-the-editor in my head (sent it this morning). After reading this thread I want to write ten more because there are so many angles from which to attack this trend.

Yesterday I watched the Family Guy episode where Lois is banned from the h.s. for teaching a comprehensive sex-ed class. Peter buys into the Abstinence Until Marriage message, buys himself a chastity belts, and tries to fuck Lois in the ear to preserve his "purity."

It's a symbol of my father giving up the covering of my heart

Her father is her pericardium?

I love how some of these purity balls have the premise that the Dads pledge to remain faithful to their wives.

I just want someone to acknowledge that monogamous, premarital sex and CHEATING are two VERY DIFFERENT THINGS. You cannot compare them.

Oh my goodness the little girls look drugged in that photo...

Her father is her pericardium?

:) Laughed. Out. Loud.

The word "creepy" is so ubiquitous on this page I won't add to the clamor. But that pretty much sums it up for me.

The obsession with female "chastity" and "purity" hearkens back to the days when females were chattel, not worth much more than camels or cattle, so their status as "unused" was all-important. But really, haven't we moved beyond that? Shouldn't we have?

That said, sex for very young girls can often be a degrading experience, but there are ways to empower girls to control and navigate their sexuality without reviving the female-as-object mindset of old.

Fathers can and should take an interest in their daughters' self esteem and act to protect them from harm. Perhaps by conducting seminars for the BOYS in their schools about the virtues of abstinence? (heh heh heh)

She's high on Jesus' love, Rzep.

ACG, I lol'ed!

One thing I did appreciate was the quote from one of the girls' older sister, who described herself as "...more of a feminist than I thought," after criticizing the purity balls - as well as their dad, who had something like nine children by seven different women.

All right- so here's my question:

We all know that one of the underlying themes of these purity balls is a father's ownership of his daughter's hymen---

What happens if the hymen is damaged for any other reason besides sex. Most young women today are active people- swimming, riding bicycles, riding horses, doing gymnastics, what-have-you. And many of these same women use tampons every month. Obviously all of these activities could lead to a broken hymen. What's next, a lottery held at the purity ball for free hymenoplasty for those girls whose "virginity" was taken by a bicycle instead of a boy?

Oh, and the picture is creepy as Heck. The little girl on the right looks like she is 6yo. How do these fathers expect to relay the message of sexual "purity" to their daughters at this age if most (I'm willing to bet) won't even broach the subject (of sex) until the girl is in puberty? I guess this is an annual event for some families?

I find it interesting that in the first paragraph it talks about girls wearing their first high heels--shoes designed to make them look older and more sexual. I have the feeling that most of these girls just want a new dress and to go to a social event. I daresay many of them are too young to take the events to heart.

How about the dad who has nine children by seven women? "Do as I say and not as I do" indeed.

It does mention that boys' events are growing in number. In our church, I've seen a couple of these and they are usually father-son events. In fact, almost every event offered to teenagers by Christian groups that I've seen recently revolve around purity and sexual behavior. This, to me, underestimates the minds and spirituality of young people to indicate that there are no more important spiritual topics to discuss.

I told my daughters that no one has the right to hurt their body, nor to tell them what to do with it--including telling them to deny themselves pleasure. They know they are valuable because I treat them, daily, as if they are, and they will be no matter what. I didn't need a ring, locket, or thousand-dollar dance to share that with them either.

Her father is her pericardium?

:) Laughed. Out. Loud.

The word "creepy" is so ubiquitous on this page I won't add to the clamor. But that pretty much sums it up for me.

The obsession with female "chastity" and "purity" hearkens back to the days when females were chattel, not worth much more than camels or cattle, so their status as "unused" was all-important. But really, haven't we moved beyond that? Shouldn't we have?

That said, sex for very young girls can often be a degrading experience, but there are ways to empower girls to control and navigate their sexuality without reviving the female-as-object mindset of old.

Fathers can and should take an interest in their daughters' self esteem and act to protect them from harm. Perhaps by conducting seminars for the BOYS in their schools about the virtues of abstinence? (heh heh heh)

The word "creepy" is so ubiquitous on this page I won't add to the clamor. But that pretty much sums it up for me.

The obsession with female "chastity" and "purity" hearkens back to the days when females were chattel, not worth much more than camels or cattle, so their status as "unused" was all-important. But really, haven't we moved beyond that? Shouldn't we have?

That said, sex for very young girls can often be a degrading experience, but there are ways to empower girls to control and navigate their sexuality without reviving the female-as-object mindset of old.

Fathers can and should take an interest in their daughters' self esteem and act to protect them from harm. Perhaps by conducting seminars for the BOYS in their schools about the virtues of abstinence? (heh heh heh)

Since it hasn't been mentioned, I'll just briefly point out that the whole thing is not only creepy but also yet another instance of compulsory heterosexuality (queer kids and parents need not apply). And, I feel very sorry for girls who never marry since they remain daddy's property for life.