Purity Culture is damaging and idolatrous

[Katy]

Several people have now sent me private messages about my comment about Elizabeth Smart's book changing my mind about purity culture.   Not that I really embraced it before, but I never thought of it as damaging.

 

Here's a link to her talking about it.  Don't play in front of children unless you are comfortable talking about kidnapping, rape, purity, etc.

 

ETA: I have been asked to make the warning stronger as the abuse of an infant is mentioned in the video.

 

 

 

 

[Anne in CA]

Can I just say that Elizabeth Smart is so well spoken that I am in awe? She never let that disgusting man steal her intellect. I am not a fan of purity culture either, although I would love to see my children remain chaste until they marry. The idea that what happens to you steals your value is wrong on every level. No one can steal the value of another human being. But you can give away your value when you hurt others.

[Hyacinth]

Thanks for posting this.

 

[MinivanMom]

I continue to be so impressed by her.

 

Listening to her share the famous "chewed gum" story is really powerful and, coming from a culture like that, it must take a great deal of strength for her to speak openly about her rape. I'm glad she's become such a strong advocate.

[Zoo Keeper]

Thanks for the link; her courage continues to amaze me. 

 

Her words on how to (or rather, how not to) teach purity, worth, and lasting value are something every parent, pastor, youth worker should hear. 

[fairfarmhand]

I found this blog post to be very relevant.

 

https://homeschoolersanonymous.wordpress.com/2015/05/26/rethinking-purity/

Quote:

"Traditional Christian theology also tells us that marriage is to look like the relationship between Jesus and the Church. One must conclude, therefore, that the greatest act of love, the greatest gift, within the context of marriage is not any one part of one’s body or one’s virginity or one’s “purity†— but rather, in similarity with Jesus’s greatest gift, the giving of one’s self to another. You — not your virginity, but all of who you are, your body, heart, and soul — is your greatest gift to your spouse. This doesn’t mean virginity cannot have value; the problem is the message that it’s the most important thing when it comes to romantic relationships. You are such much more than whether you are a virgin or not. And that you — being an amazing and beautiful individual made in the image of God — want to give your life to share the journey of life with another human being? That is the ultimate gift.

 

But homeschool students and alumni learned otherwise. They learned that the greatest gift was not their selves but rather their virginity. And it is so important to see how this unbiblical teaching has led to great damage. Because when students and alumni are taught to value their virginity over their selves, their self-worth becomes inherently linked to their “purity.†Hence the idea young women have absorbed — that, If a woman is no longer a virgin, she’s worth less. Kidnapping survivor Elizabeth Smart spoke of this idea last year when she said that after being kidnapped and abused it was “easy…to feel like you no longer have worth, you no longer have value.â€[xiv] Smart directly related this feeling to the purity teachings she had imbibed."

[Katy]

I found this blog post to be very relevant.

 

https://homeschoolersanonymous.wordpress.com/2015/05/26/rethinking-purity/

Quote:

"Traditional Christian theology also tells us that marriage is to look like the relationship between Jesus and the Church. One must conclude, therefore, that the greatest act of love, the greatest gift, within the context of marriage is not any one part of one’s body or one’s virginity or one’s “purity†— but rather, in similarity with Jesus’s greatest gift, the giving of one’s self to another. You — not your virginity, but all of who you are, your body, heart, and soul — is your greatest gift to your spouse. This doesn’t mean virginity cannot have value; the problem is the message that it’s the most important thing when it comes to romantic relationships. You are such much more than whether you are a virgin or not. And that you — being an amazing and beautiful individual made in the image of God — want to give your life to share the journey of life with another human being? That is the ultimate gift.

....

 

That's beautiful.  Thanks for posting this.

[JumpyTheFrog]

Maybe we need to teach our kids that it doesn't matter whether they are virgins or not, but rather whether they are currently chaste. Perhaps the emphasis on virginity leads them to think, "Oh well, I had sex once. I've already blown it. I might as well continue." Maybe it should be like a diet, where we focus on avoiding falling off the wagon and on getting back on, but not so much about the actual "cheating" itself?

[RioSamba]

Thank you for sharing this. I will be sharing it with DD. I have no words to adequately express my admiration for Elizabeth Smart. Wow.

[bolt.]

I agree with "damaging" -- but I'm thinking that "idolatrous" is really the wrong word for it (theologically speaking).

[fairfarmhand]

That's beautiful.  Thanks for posting this.

 

That blog post is so insightful. She goes on to try to help homeschoolers/Christians of the 1990s understand where our parents were coming from and why they tended to harp on purity and dating, like it was some sort of curse.

 

The author tries to help families understand the generation gap that was so prevalent. She describes how important the purity DIALOG has to be, It's not a monologue. It's a discussion to help kids and parents understand one another. If it becomes a monologue, it becomes repressive, about guilt and fear.

 

"I was living in a shadow of misunderstanding and fear because my parents did not publicly express dissent about certain prevailing ideas and they never bothered to ask me what I was hearing from the homeschool culture around me.

Now take all those observations and apply them directly to the modesty and purity issue. You have a whole life of experiences.

 

For my parents, it was experiences growing up in the 60’s and 70’s and reacting to certain expressions of love and sexuality they found harmful. And in response to those experiences, they came up with — and listened to others come up with — ideas for how to avoid the pain and heartache they experienced. They came up with ideas about modesty and purity and bought Josh Harris’s book I Kissed Dating Goodbye and we attended seminars by Reb Bradley about Preparing Your Children for Courtship and Marriage.

 

But my fellow alumni and I didn’t grow up in the 60’s and 70’s. We grew up in often sheltered and protective homes. So our parents’ expressions of love and sexuality — built in reaction to their culture’s expressions of love and sexuality — mean something entirely different to us than to our parents. They are heard differently, felt differently, and lived differently. So much is lost in translation.

 

And when modesty and purity get communicated — in our culture with our experiences — with a line like,

 

The greatest gift a young Christian woman can give her future husband is the gift of her purity.

 

…we are not thinking about Woodstock. We are not thinking about the Free Love Movement. We are thinking about holding hands or the Antebellum Dances or the swing dances so popular in homeschooling circles. We are thinking that if we lose that “gift of purity†(whether by force or willingly), our worth has been diminished."

[JumpyTheFrog]

Ah, Reb Bradley. I read an article by him a year or two ago where he talked about how he was too strict with his kids and it caused one of his sons to fall in with what he thought was a bad crowd. Unfortunately, in the article it was clear he still didn't realize just how over the top he'd been. It was like the light-bulb was blinking, but not really coming in.

 

I've only read one of his books. It might have been called someone about "Child Training Hints." I bet he and Micael Pearl would get along great.

[Garga]

I think the purity movement cheapens marriage. Marriage becomes entirely about sex. Marriage is not about sex. Sex should be a small part of it. But the purity movement makes it seem like that's the sole point of marriage.

[Katy]

I agree with "damaging" -- but I'm thinking that "idolatrous" is really the wrong word for it (theologically speaking).

 

I think it idolizes virginity.

[JumpyTheFrog]

Over on The Wartburg Watch, one of the regular commenters agrees with the above (about it resulting in marriage being mostly about sex). He refers to the push for early marriage as couples making hasty decisions just so they can have "legal" sex.

[Squawky Acres]

I have been thinking a lot about this lately, as I remember my experience growing up in youth groups in the 1990's.  I was not homeschooled, but do remember an activity in our church group in which a girl had to stand up in front of everyone with a large paper heart.  She then walked across the room with different boys from the group, and each time had to give them a piece of the heart until there was nothing but a small scrap left.  It was an illustration about dating and promiscuity and having "nothing" to offer a husband.  A few years later, she married hastily at age 17 to an absolutely unsuitable boy, and was divorced a year later.  I remember being sickened to hear said unsuitable boy crowing about how well marriage takes care of the lust problem.

 

I want my children to make wise decisions, and not to waste their precious time and emotional energy in sleeping around, or to be so naive as to become easy victims of abuse -- but I also don't want to shame them into feelings of worthlessness or too-early marriages.  I am wondering how to have healthy communication about this, and found the discussion of dialogue to be very helpful.

[bolt.]

I think it idolizes virginity.

I think it exaggerates and honours the (alleged) importance of virginity to an absurd degree... But I don't think that's what "idolization" is: theologically (based on the Bible, as it pertains to Christianity).

 

I think lots of people use "idolize" that way, so I get it.

 

Theologically, idolization is to openly consider something to actually *be* a deity, and to venerate it with acts of worship/service, and generally relate to it as your real and actual spiritual authority.

 

There is some (limited) use of the concept of idolatry as a metaphor in the Bible, but in those cases it conveys specific content: not just the general idea of absurdly inflating the (alleged) spiritual significance of an idea.

[JumpyTheFrog]

What we really need is data on the "happy marriage" rate of these early marriages. The divorce rate isn't that useful because the same groups pushing "purity" are also against divorce for nearly all reasons.

 

I suspect we'll see a wave of divorces in the next ten years from those who were pushed into marrying without ever having dated around a bit. While I really want my kids to avoid pre-marital sex, making a terrible marriage choice seems to be even worse. It's going to be hard to guide them through a middle path, since the general culture says pre-marital sex is just fine, while conservative Christianity promotes all this "saving your first kiss" nonsense. I'm not sure where to find materials or friends who promote chastity without all the baggage.

[fairfarmhand]

What we really need is data on the "happy marriage" rate of these early marriages. The divorce rate isn't that useful because the same groups pushing "purity" are also against divorce for nearly all reasons.

 

I suspect we'll see a wave of divorces in the next ten years from those who were pushed into marrying without ever having dated around a bit. While I really want my kids to avoid pre-marital sex, making a terrible marriage choice seems to be even worse. It's going to be hard to guide them through a middle path, since the general culture says pre-marital sex is just fine, while conservative Christianity promotes all this "saving your first kiss" nonsense. I'm not sure where to find materials or friends who promote chastity without all the baggage.

 

I just recommended this book to someone.

 

http://www.amazon.com/Dating-Integrity-Honoring-relationships-opposite/dp/1887840524

 

I liked it very much. It is written directly to young people so it's not a controlling parent trying to micromanage their young adult's dating life. He encourages young people to befriend and meet many people...of both sexes. He says there's nothing wrong with dating dozens of people as long as you practice honesty and integrity as you do it. (In other words, don't lead people on, giving them the impression that you are exclusive when you aren't)

 

Here's what I typed in my original recommendation.

 

"

At last! I found a book that articulates my ideas about dating for teens and young adults.

 

It's called Dating With Integrity by John Holzman.

 

We don't like the typical dating model. Guy and girl get together for a few months, kiss, hug, go to dinner, get all romantic. Break up. And do it all again with someone else a few weeks later.

 

We definitely don't agree with the "worldly" (for lack of a better term, although using that word kind of makes me cringe) model. "Hey! Let's go to dinner. Nice legs. Want to check into a hotel?" (I know... that's an exaggeration. But many people operate with casual sex as a viable option in the dating world, and as Christians, I don't want my kids doing that)

 

Because of the two above models, some families moved to a "courtship model." This model on the surface seems better, but I feel that in some cases, it prevents young people from getting to know each other as friends before they are thrust into a committed relationship. I've not had much success understanding how one determines how one goes from "That guy seems nice" to "I think we need to get married." This model seems like it encourages getting overly committed before knowing someone very well. I also dislike the intense control that some families exhibit in the dating lives of their kids. Of course, as younger teens, I will tell them when where and who they will go out with, but I want a model that teaches THE KIDS how to have good judgement in their relationships with the opposite sex. Since I expect my kids (even my girls) to attend college, chances are they will be meeting and possibly dating young people while I AM NOT AROUND TO MONITOR THEIR RELATIONSHIPS.

 

So this book was a breath of fresh air. It assumes that young men and young women will date one another. However, the author doesn't treat them as big balls of ignorant hormones who must avoid ever being in the presence of the opposite sex because of temptation. The author details how a Christian young person should date others. They should strive to be a blessing to people of both genders. He encourages men and women to treat people of the opposite sex as brothers and sisters in Christ. He tells them to be honest, both with their words, actions, and implications. However, he also encourages discretion and teaches young people to consider what they want out of a relationship and where they expect it will lead.

 

Therefore, he encourages young people to spend plenty of time with friends of both genders, whether or not there are romantic implications. He wants them to bless one another. It was quite a novel idea to me. A very "others centered" and honest way of approaching dating."

 

The author does encourage young people to avoid many physical touch aspect of dating, not only because of "temptation" but because it sets up an expectation of exclusivity that the couple may or may not be willing to fulfill.

 

It was different from many Christian dating books.

[Squawky Acres]

Thank you for the book recommendation.  It seems like it could be a sensible approach.  Growing up, I hated that exclusivity model.  Go on a few dates, guy wants to get all exclusive very quickly, and then you're stuck until you can think of a reason to break up with him.  It wasted so much time!  I longed for the arrangements I read about in classic literature -- what I called the days of "one woman, many suitors."  Interested men come to call, woman gets to have tea and conversation with them in the safety of her home, no exclusivity, no expectations, no pressure to become physical, until someone captures her heart and they get engaged.  

 

When I first learned of the courtship model, it sounded a little bit like my ideal classic literature model . . . until I saw how it was playing out in real life.  Families were exercising way too much control, kids couldn't just get to know each other without all of these early marriage expectations, and many women in particular were staying home for a long long time (into their late 20's and 30's) with no marriage prospects in sight.

 

ETA:  um sorry, "tea," not "TeA."

[Jaz]

I have changed my mind about the purity culture too and I'm glad I did before my dc were teens. I support dating at an older age (college) and waiting for sex before marriage, but those are my views that I'll encourage my dc to think about.

 

Please consider a little stronger warning about the video as she talked about the abuse of a very little girl.

[ErinE]

She is so brave to speak out. The chewing gum analogy was so sad.

 

 

[gardenmom5]

I continue to be so impressed by her.

 

Listening to her share the famous "chewed gum" story is really powerful and, coming from a culture like that, it must take a great deal of strength for her to speak openly about her rape. I'm glad she's become such a strong advocate.

:confused1:   a culture like what?  (the chewed gum story was a public school teacher.)

so much focus is on voluntary - that the state of the unwilling victim gets overlooked.  

 

 

I just recommended this book to someone.

 

http://www.amazon.com/Dating-Integrity-Honoring-relationships-opposite/dp/1887840524

 

I liked it very much. It is written directly to young people so it's not a controlling parent trying to micromanage their young adult's dating life. He encourages young people to befriend and meet many people...of both sexes. He says there's nothing wrong with dating dozens of people as long as you practice honesty and integrity as you do it. (In other words, don't lead people on, giving them the impression that you are exclusive when you aren't)

 

Here's what I typed in my original recommendation.

 

"

At last! I found a book that articulates my ideas about dating for teens and young adults.

 

It's called Dating With Integrity by John Holzman.

 

We don't like the typical dating model. Guy and girl get together for a few months, kiss, hug, go to dinner, get all romantic. Break up. And do it all again with someone else a few weeks later.

 

We definitely don't agree with the "worldly" (for lack of a better term, although using that word kind of makes me cringe) model. "Hey! Let's go to dinner. Nice legs. Want to check into a hotel?" (I know... that's an exaggeration. But many people operate with casual sex as a viable option in the dating world, and as Christians, I don't want my kids doing that)

 

Because of the two above models, some families moved to a "courtship model." This model on the surface seems better, but I feel that in some cases, it prevents young people from getting to know each other as friends before they are thrust into a committed relationship. I've not had much success understanding how one determines how one goes from "That guy seems nice" to "I think we need to get married." This model seems like it encourages getting overly committed before knowing someone very well. I also dislike the intense control that some families exhibit in the dating lives of their kids. Of course, as younger teens, I will tell them when where and who they will go out with, but I want a model that teaches THE KIDS how to have good judgement in their relationships with the opposite sex. Since I expect my kids (even my girls) to attend college, chances are they will be meeting and possibly dating young people while I AM NOT AROUND TO MONITOR THEIR RELATIONSHIPS.

 

So this book was a breath of fresh air. It assumes that young men and young women will date one another. However, the author doesn't treat them as big balls of ignorant hormones who must avoid ever being in the presence of the opposite sex because of temptation. The author details how a Christian young person should date others. They should strive to be a blessing to people of both genders. He encourages men and women to treat people of the opposite sex as brothers and sisters in Christ. He tells them to be honest, both with their words, actions, and implications. However, he also encourages discretion and teaches young people to consider what they want out of a relationship and where they expect it will lead.

 

Therefore, he encourages young people to spend plenty of time with friends of both genders, whether or not there are romantic implications. He wants them to bless one another. It was quite a novel idea to me. A very "others centered" and honest way of approaching dating."

 

The author does encourage young people to avoid many physical touch aspect of dating, not only because of "temptation" but because it sets up an expectation of exclusivity that the couple may or may not be willing to fulfill.

 

It was different from many Christian dating books.

 

this.

 

I have very open  conversations with my kids (if they want to), and one thing ds and I have discussed is "does this person make you a better person for being with them?"

 

we can't control our kids (and shouldn't even try) - they have to swim on their own.  so, we need to teach them *how*.

 

dd (she just got married) generally dated guys a scant handful of times before moving on.   she almost never said anything to us - and for a few reasons.  several of her friends had mother's who would see their adult children dating and the MOTHER's immediately started moving to "oh, let's make wedding plans".  (umm, I kinda think they're the ones who are supposed to decide that?) 

 

while teens do need supervision - it needs to back off as they get older.  because ultimately, it is their choice. they have to do it themselves - we can't do it for them.

[Katy]

I think it exaggerates and honours the (alleged) importance of virginity to an absurd degree... But I don't think that's what "idolization" is: theologically (based on the Bible, as it pertains to Christianity).

 

I think lots of people use "idolize" that way, so I get it.

 

Theologically, idolization is to openly consider something to actually *be* a deity, and to venerate it with acts of worship/service, and generally relate to it as your real and actual spiritual authority.

 

There is some (limited) use of the concept of idolatry as a metaphor in the Bible, but in those cases it conveys specific content: not just the general idea of absurdly inflating the (alleged) spiritual significance of an idea.

 

I think this is a minor point in the scheme of things, but I don't think it has to be a deity to theologically be an idol.  IE: Moses went up on a mountain and disappeared for days and people melted down their gold to make an idol.  They had just witnessed God and knew better, but they wanted something to focus on for comfort.

 

Not many people in the western world would admit to idol worship today, but an argument could easily be made that we worship many things that are created, and not the creator.  IE:  environmentalism, animals in the form of veganism, appetites, fame, money, power, and even virginity can take on a role of importance in our lives that we can easily worship them, even if to some degree they can all be good. It is good to not abuse animals.  It is good to take care of the earth.  All of those things can be very good or at least morally neutral.  To another degree the focus on them can be damaging.    I think Matthew 6:24 and Philippians 3:19, among others, support my stance.

 

I have a close friend who was raped as a child.  She was in a very conservative church that focused on purity.  She had some broken courtships when a man heard she wasn't a virgin.  How amazing she is was secondary to her being "impure."  It had nothing to do with her character.  She was a victim.  They idolized virginity and purity and felt entitled to it.

[Katy]

I have changed my mind about the purity culture too and I'm glad I did before my dc were teens. I support dating at an older age (college) and waiting for sex before marriage, but those are my views that I'll encourage my dc to think about.

 

Please consider a little stronger warning about the video as she talked about the abuse of a very little girl.

 

Sorry, I changed the warning.

[Mimm]

My mother treated sex like it was a taboo subject. She rarely spoke about it but when she did, it was usually negative don't-ever-do-it. For instance, she told me once that one of her friends in high school had sex and she was never able to see that girl the same way again. I very much felt like my value was wrapped up in my virginity and the consequences for having sex would be dire. She encouraged me to get married young (I was 18 when I was engaged and 19 when I got married). She made several statements that implied that she was happy I was married before I'd had a chance to have sex and that if I'd waited to get married, I would have blown it.

 

I'm the oldest and the only one of my siblings that waited. I don't regret waiting, but I do feel like it was extra baggage I didn't need. I wish the decision had felt more like mine instead of bowing to outside pressure (which I did a lot at that age). My mother has shown a disturbing emotional investment in her adult children's virginity. Kind of preoccupied with it. She doesn't bring it up often but when it does... it's weird.

 

All this has left me at a loss with how to discuss and approach these things with my own children. I talk to them a lot about any subject they bring up. I think I overcompensate with my uncomfortableness with bluntness. Anyway, threads like this are helpful. I have realized before this thread that I need to make sure that my children know that they are not diminished in any way in my eyes if they choose to have sex. And I need to reiterate again that they need to come to me for birth control if needed. One of my sisters got pregnant at 16 so that topic has come up.

[MinivanMom]

:confused1:   a culture like what?  (the chewed gum story was a public school teacher.)

so much focus is on voluntary - that the state of the unwilling victim gets overlooked.  

 

I was referring to Utah culture.

 

I've heard so many similar stories from friends who grew up in Utah: weird off-topic things said by public school teachers during sex-ed (which I assume was abstinence only sex-ed). The strangest stories I heard were about the "maturation nights" where parents would go to the school in the evening with their kids, so that the teachers could teach them both about sex and maturation! I am very pro-school sex ed, but somehow that dynamic seemed weird to me. The common thread always seemed to be public school teachers overstepping their authority or over-sharing personal/cultural views. I've heard some crazy purity/chastity stories about Utah Seminary teachers as well, which is something I've never encountered outside Utah (though I'm sure it exists).

[happypamama]

Fairfarmhand, thanks for that book recommendation! I'd like the able to offer some ideas in between courtship and lots of casual dating to my children. I totally agree with your assessment about where our parents were coming from, and maybe Josh Harris was appropriate for the time in which it was written. (I haven't read it myself. I think it and the Ludys' books are a little younger than I am, and my parents never really got to decide on their overall philosophy for my dating life, because it just kind of happened and came with its own benefits and pitfalls.)

 

I think the idea that if you've had sex, you'll have nothing to offer a spouse is kinda terrible. Don't we all have different degrees of things we can offer a spouse? By that reckoning, if you've come from a family with divorced parents, you're somehow lacking, or if your family didn't cook, you're lacking, or whatever. We all have areas in which we are better able to give to and serve our spouses and children, and areas in which we aren't as easily able. Shouldn't a Christian marriage be focusing on overcoming our weak areas and working to be better partners, whether that's as lovers, housekeepers, or parents?

 

At the same time, I agree with the sentiment to a degree, and that's where it gets hard. I do think sex is best saved for marriage, and I hope that for my children. I think it can be tricky to convey what you believe to be the ideal and not make it seem like it's all about that, or that your children have somehow failed if they don't make that ideal. We train and teach our children so they can have the best options for education ahead of them too, but if they don't get their or our first choice selections, we don't strive to make them feel worthless. We help them pick up and carry on toward the new goal. (It's not a perfect analogy. Just pointing out that our children are more than their college degrees or virginity statuses or whatever.).

 

Just as an aside, I've always disliked the purity rings (and balls! although daddy-daughter dances without the other baggage sound sweet) and "true love waits" pledges and all that were the rage when I was a teen. I refused to sign them, not because I felt like I wanted to have sex with my boyfriend, but because I always felt like they were asking for a promise that a teenager wasn't really capable of making, especially not as a young one. What does a thirteen year old know about marriage and true intimacy? It's all well and good to decide not to have sex when you're fourteen, and it doesn't even happen to be on the table because there are no special boys in your life, but when you do meet that special someone, you need a whole different sort of counseling and advice, and it's less about sex and virginity and more about what marriage and self sacrifice really mean. Of course, I've also said several times that people should get remarried about five or seven years in, when they actually have a clue what marriage, communication, sharing a life really mean. (But maybe the pledges help when teens or young adults feel pressured or are highly in love but would regret having sex later, just like maybe the legal marriage contract helps when people are not feeling like sticking with it. I'm probably not right to judge the pledges that way, but I won't push them on my kids either.)

[happypamama]

My mother treated sex like it was a taboo subject. She rarely spoke about it but when she did, it was usually negative don't-ever-do-it. For instance, she told me once that one of her friends in high school had sex and she was never able to see that girl the same way again. I very much felt like my value was wrapped up in my virginity and the consequences for having sex would be dire. She encouraged me to get married young (I was 18 when I was engaged and 19 when I got married). She made several statements that implied that she was happy I was married before I'd had a chance to have sex and that if I'd waited to get married, I would have blown it.

 

I'm the oldest and the only one of my siblings that waited. I don't regret waiting, but I do feel like it was extra baggage I didn't need. I wish the decision had felt more like mine instead of bowing to outside pressure (which I did a lot at that age). My mother has shown a disturbing emotional investment in her adult children's virginity. Kind of preoccupied with it. She doesn't bring it up often but when it does... it's weird.

 

All this has left me at a loss with how to discuss and approach these things with my own children. I talk to them a lot about any subject they bring up. I think I overcompensate with my uncomfortableness with bluntness. Anyway, threads like this are helpful. I have realized before this thread that I need to make sure that my children know that they are not diminished in any way in my eyes if they choose to have sex. And I need to reiterate again that they need to come to me for birth control if needed. One of my sisters got pregnant at 16 so that topic has come up.

I honestly think not enough is made of that fact. The fact is that every time you have sex, you are chancing a pregnancy. If you make a baby with someone that isn't the right person for you, then you are stuck with multiple difficult options: abortion, adoption, or being tied to that person for the next twenty years in one fashion or another. And if you're a boy, you have a lot less say in what choice gets made and are stuck with whatever decision she makes.

[Squawky Acres]

I honestly think not enough is made of that fact. The fact is that every time you have sex, you are chancing a pregnancy. If you make a baby with someone that isn't the right person for you, then you are stuck with multiple difficult options: abortion, adoption, or being tied to that person for the next twenty years in one fashion or another. And if you're a boy, you have a lot less say in what choice gets made and are stuck with whatever decision she makes.

 

This is a very good point.  It is so important to communicate the wisdom of waiting for marriage, while also communicating that it's not all about virginity.  A teenager or young adult should be free to make better choices in the future without feeling that nothing matters anymore because he or she is no longer a virgin.  Because it does matter.  Better choices can prevent the pain of an unwanted pregnancy, being linked to someone for the next twenty years, or having to deal with a partner's choices that may not be yours.

[gardenmom5]

My mother treated sex like it was a taboo subject. She rarely spoke about it but when she did, it was usually negative don't-ever-do-it. For instance, she told me once that one of her friends in high school had sex and she was never able to see that girl the same way again. I very much felt like my value was wrapped up in my virginity and the consequences for having sex would be dire. She encouraged me to get married young (I was 18 when I was engaged and 19 when I got married). She made several statements that implied that she was happy I was married before I'd had a chance to have sex and that if I'd waited to get married, I would have blown it.

 

I'm the oldest and the only one of my siblings that waited. I don't regret waiting, but I do feel like it was extra baggage I didn't need. I wish the decision had felt more like mine instead of bowing to outside pressure (which I did a lot at that age). My mother has shown a disturbing emotional investment in her adult children's virginity. Kind of preoccupied with it. She doesn't bring it up often but when it does... it's weird.

 

All this has left me at a loss with how to discuss and approach these things with my own children. I talk to them a lot about any subject they bring up. I think I overcompensate with my uncomfortableness with bluntness. Anyway, threads like this are helpful. I have realized before this thread that I need to make sure that my children know that they are not diminished in any way in my eyes if they choose to have sex. And I need to reiterate again that they need to come to me for birth control if needed. One of my sisters got pregnant at 16 so that topic has come up.

 

my grandmother (from rural Midwest) was like that.  she had a very prurient, almost salacious gossipy, interest in sex.  it really was like she wanted girls to have s3x so she could make degrading comments about them.  and it didn't stop at my mother.  (oh, the drama from her because I had a baby nine months after I got married . . . you'd think I had s3x on my wedding night! ;)  my golden/victim sister miscarried her FOURTH pg the day after she got married to a guy she was only marrying because she was pg. . . . but I was the "trashy" one.  and I married for love and wanting to spend my life with him.) 

 

 she's the main reason I think my mother acted like a rebellious teenager when SHE HAD teenagers.  she was rebelling against her mother.  and never stopped. 

 

my grandmother was not emotionally healthy - NPD, and there are rumors her own father abused some of the sisters.  (there were 10 girls.)  several of the sisters had very weird attitudes towards s3x.  (one slept with her daughter so she didn't have to share a bed with her husband. . . . the daughter severed contact with her.)

 

It is possible to completely change how we rear our daughters and sons.  not sure how I managed sometimes, but my relationship with them is night and day different than mine was with my mother/grandmother.

[Audrey]

Several people have now sent me private messages about my comment about Elizabeth Smart's book changing my mind about purity culture.   Not that I really embraced it before, but I never thought of it as damaging.

 

Here's a link to her talking about it.  Don't play in front of children unless you are comfortable talking about kidnapping, rape, purity, etc.

 

ETA: I have been asked to make the warning stronger as the abuse of an infant is mentioned in the video.

 

 

The chewing gum analogy is very sad.  Someone here once also made a similar analogy that having sex with a non-virgin bride was like swimming in a sewer as opposed to the pristine pool she should have been.   

 

Disgusting analogies that reduce a woman and her body to inanimate property abound in this type of thinking.

[fairfarmhand]

Thank you for the book recommendation.  It seems like it could be a sensible approach.  Growing up, I hated that exclusivity model.  Go on a few dates, guy wants to get all exclusive very quickly, and then you're stuck until you can think of a reason to break up with him.  It wasted so much time!  I longed for the arrangements I read about in classic literature -- what I called the days of "one woman, many suitors."  Interested men come to call, woman gets to have tea and conversation with them in the safety of her home, no exclusivity, no expectations, no pressure to become physical, until someone captures her heart and they get engaged.  

 

When I first learned of the courtship model, it sounded a little bit like my ideal classic literature model . . . until I saw how it was playing out in real life.  Families were exercising way too much control, kids couldn't just get to know each other without all of these early marriage expectations, and many women in particular were staying home for a long long time (into their late 20's and 30's) with no marriage prospects in sight.

 

ETA:  um sorry, "tea," not "TeA."

One thing that fascinates me about his approach is that he doesn't expect the man to always ask the woman. He doesnt expect the man to always pay. He says treat your dates like you would if you were going to dinner with your bio brother/sister. Sometimes you split the check, sometimes the guy treats, sometimes the girl treats.

 

He even tells girls, "Hey, if you are looking for a marriage relationship and the guy you really kind of like doesn't seem forthcoming, ask him why. Ask him if he would consider that or not. If he's not interested, that tells you not to break up with him, but to keep him in friend department and look elsewhere for potential marriage suitors." He says there's nothing unladylike or unChristian about women being honest and direct in their dating relationships.

 

I can see his point. Rather than making assumptions and playing the "game" it would be easier if people just said, "Hey we're friends." or "Hey I'm looking for marriage partners."

[fairfarmhand]

Fairfarmhand, thanks for that book recommendation! I'd like the able to offer some ideas in between courtship and lots of casual dating to my children. I totally agree with your assessment about where our parents were coming from, and maybe Josh Harris was appropriate for the time in which it was written. (I haven't read it myself. I think it and the Ludys' books are a little younger than I am, and my parents never really got to decide on their overall philosophy for my dating life, because it just kind of happened and came with its own benefits and pitfalls.)

 

I think the idea that if you've had sex, you'll have nothing to offer a spouse is kinda terrible. Don't we all have different degrees of things we can offer a spouse? By that reckoning, if you've come from a family with divorced parents, you're somehow lacking, or if your family didn't cook, you're lacking, or whatever. We all have areas in which we are better able to give to and serve our spouses and children, and areas in which we aren't as easily able. Shouldn't a Christian marriage be focusing on overcoming our weak areas and working to be better partners, whether that's as lovers, housekeepers, or parents?

 

At the same time, I agree with the sentiment to a degree, and that's where it gets hard. I do think sex is best saved for marriage, and I hope that for my children. I think it can be tricky to convey what you believe to be the ideal and not make it seem like it's all about that, or that your children have somehow failed if they don't make that ideal. We train and teach our children so they can have the best options for education ahead of them too, but if they don't get their or our first choice selections, we don't strive to make them feel worthless. We help them pick up and carry on toward the new goal. (It's not a perfect analogy. Just pointing out that our children are more than their college degrees or virginity statuses or whatever.).

 

Just as an aside, I've always disliked the purity rings (and balls! although daddy-daughter dances without the other baggage sound sweet) and "true love waits" pledges and all that were the rage when I was a teen. I refused to sign them, not because I felt like I wanted to have sex with my boyfriend, but because I always felt like they were asking for a promise that a teenager wasn't really capable of making, especially not as a young one. What does a thirteen year old know about marriage and true intimacy? It's all well and good to decide not to have sex when you're fourteen, and it doesn't even happen to be on the table because there are no special boys in your life, but when you do meet that special someone, you need a whole different sort of counseling and advice, and it's less about sex and virginity and more about what marriage and self sacrifice really mean. Of course, I've also said several times that people should get remarried about five or seven years in, when they actually have a clue what marriage, communication, sharing a life really mean. (But maybe the pledges help when teens or young adults feel pressured or are highly in love but would regret having sex later, just like maybe the legal marriage contract helps when people are not feeling like sticking with it. I'm probably not right to judge the pledges that way, but I won't push them on my kids either.)

Here's what I want my kids to hear.

 

"Love Jesus with all that you are. Obey him. Please him in all your relationships. He loves you and wants what is best for you. You will be amazed how life plays out when you truly surrender everything to Jesus."

 

And then I'll tell them that there's so much grace out there.

 

They know the facts of life. They know about sex and pregnancy. (When you live on a farm, you get it.) My first dd was a teen pregnancy. I've been open about how hard those first few years were.

 

But really, if I can cultivate a heart of love for Jesus, His Word, His People, and encourage them to have good, Godly friends, I think we will do okay. Ultimately, though, it is their decision. And they will have to live with what they decide.

 

 

[Audrey]

One thing that fascinates me about his approach is that he doesn't expect the man to always ask the woman. He doesnt expect the man to always pay. He says treat your dates like you would if you were going to dinner with your bio brother/sister. Sometimes you split the check, sometimes the guy treats, sometimes the girl treats.

 

He even tells girls, "Hey, if you are looking for a marriage relationship and the guy you really kind of like doesn't seem forthcoming, ask him why. Ask him if he would consider that or not. If he's not interested, that tells you not to break up with him, but to keep him in friend department and look elsewhere for potential marriage suitors." He says there's nothing unladylike or unChristian about women being honest and direct in their dating relationships.

 

I can see his point. Rather than making assumptions and playing the "game" it would be easier if people just said, "Hey we're friends." or "Hey I'm looking for marriage partners."

 

That's good practical advice.  The books recommending coyness and such heap a huge burden on the male partner by making them assume mind-reader abilities.  I'm quite sure that a bit of demystifying would be most welcome by most gentlemen when it comes to their partners/potential partners.

[fairfarmhand]

You know, it's funny. We've never had a "dating age." We've never done a "courtship" arrangement. We don't even really have a set "curfew" for my daughter.

 

She's enjoyed many fun, friendly relationships with boys throughout her teen years. She knows right now, marriage isn't something she's interested in. She has too many things to do and too many places she wants to go. I had courting families shocked that I allowed her to go to Jr. Sr. Prom with the young man I babysat when she and he were very small. They just got dressed up and went to dinner and stuff. So what? And that's all they did. They had a great time.

 

She may not talk to him for 6 weeks at a time. But they'll go to prom together just to enjoy each other's company.  I can't see anything wrong with that.

 

I mean, I can sit and talk with my brother in laws for an hour and no one assumes we are "interested" in anything other than talking about gardening, or our kids, or whatever.

[gardenmom5]

The chewing gum analogy is very sad.  Someone here once also made a similar analogy that having sex with a non-virgin bride was like swimming in a sewer as opposed to the pristine pool she should have been.   

 

Disgusting analogies that reduce a woman and her body to inanimate property abound in this type of thinking.

 

the other thing that's disgusting about this thinking: the double standard.  I can't *ever* remember hearing these types of comments about boys.

[MaeFlowers]

I think the purity movement cheapens marriage. Marriage becomes entirely about sex. Marriage is not about sex. Sex should be a small part of it. But the purity movement makes it seem like that's the sole point of marriage.

This. One day while wondering around different forums on tapatalk, I came across a Christian marriage forum. The advice they gave young adults was to hurry up and get married if you can't wait any longer. It blew.my.mind. No respect for marriage.

[DesertBlossom]

I find the thread title a little bit insulting. I do not agree with the chewed gum or swimming in a sewer (gasp!) analogy, But I do think that teaching abstinence before marriage can be effective and be done well. The blog post linked above I thought was interesting, pointing out that what parents and teachers teach isn't always exactly what kids hear. 

 

[gardenmom5]

I find the thread title a little bit insulting. I do not agree with the chewed gum or swimming in a sewer (gasp!) analogy, But I do think that teaching abstinence before marriage can be effective and be done well. The blog post linked above I thought was interesting, pointing out that what parents and teachers teach isn't always exactly what kids hear. 

 

there are several of us on this thread that have taught abstinence before marriage.  and four of my kids are adults - and practice abstinence before marriage.  (one just got married.)

[Jaz]

Sorry, I changed the warning.

 

Thank you!

[Squawky Acres]

I find the thread title a little bit insulting. I do not agree with the chewed gum or swimming in a sewer (gasp!) analogy, But I do think that teaching abstinence before marriage can be effective and be done well. The blog post linked above I thought was interesting, pointing out that what parents and teachers teach isn't always exactly what kids hear. 

 

I understand that the OP's title could come across as critical of abstinence teachings, but I don't think that was the intent.  It was actually very eye-opening for me to think about how one can fully believe in abstinence before marriage yet see that the "purity culture" (elevation of virginity above all else; you are worthless if not a virgin) can be damaging.

 

Maybe this is off-topic, but I would love it if someone could point me to some other threads on this topic -- how to effectively teach abstinence before marriage without shutting down conversation, without shaming victims, and without communicating that virginity is somehow tied to one's self-worth.  In my church growing up, I saw it done very badly.  It did seem that it was all about virginity, with no grace for victims or for those who may have fallen short of that ideal in the past. 

[Pamela H in Texas]

 the state of the unwilling victim gets overlooked.  

 

 

When 1 in 5 girls and 1 in 20 boys is sexually abused (and 70% of those are done by someone close to us so none of us is really "immune" to the possibility), we need to quit overlooking the state of the unwilling.  

 

Additionally, there are reasons that 12yo girls sleep around and have 50 partners by 17.  You aren't going to shame a girl into stopping that. They too need more and better.

 

There have been some good quotes in this thread that I have appreciated as a victim and as the mother of victims.  We don't have to throw the baby out with the bath water.  We do need to be a LOT more careful about the state of that bath water.  JMO.

[MaeFlowers]

I understand that the OP's title could come across as critical of abstinence teachings, but I don't think that was the intent. It was actually very eye-opening for me to think about how one can fully believe in abstinence before marriage yet see that the "purity culture" (elevation of virginity above all else; you are worthless if not a virgin) can be damaging.

 

Maybe this is off-topic, but I would love it if someone could point me to some other threads on this topic -- how to effectively teach abstinence before marriage without shutting down conversation, without shaming victims, and without communicating that virginity is somehow tied to one's self-worth. In my church growing up, I saw it done very badly. It did seem that it was all about virginity, with no grace for victims or for those who may have fallen short of that ideal in the past.

I am not sure of any other threads on this topic but I can tell you what I was taught in Catholic school. **I** think it was effective. As far as I know, no one from our school (about 250 students) ended up pregnant before graduation.

We were basically taught to abstain but not for the reasons of purity. What I mean is, it wasn't framed in that light. We were taught the risks with the primary focus being pregnancy. For most, that is the main concern when you aren't focused on the purity side of things. We were taught about the realities of parenthood. They seriously broke it down. From the cost of prenatal vitamins and diapers to the cost of day care. The financial responsibilities, the emotional and physical responsibilities. All of it. They tried to teach us that parenthood was a BIG deal and, therefore, so was intercourse. It wasnt something you played at, you needed maturity, stability and a college education first. (Okay, not literally on the college education. But, they tried to show us how hard it would be on minimum wage high school income.) You needed to be an adult.

I am sure that some could find fault in this. But, it stuck with me and I didn't feel as though it shamed us into behaving.

I don't know if that helps any or if it even answers your question. Just my .02.

[Cammie]

Gosh, feeling like such a rebel.

 

What about teaching about birth control.  So that sex before marriage won't end up with a pregnancy?

 

I didn't wait for marriage.  I don't expect my children to either.  With people (especially highly educated and professional women) getting married later and later in life, why would they wait to have an intimate relationship?

 

I am probably going to be scewered here...but I think that those relationships can also be casual, sometimes.  And serious, sometimes.  And kids should understand that a physical relationship is not the be all and end all of everything.

 

And "purity" - gah.  Having an intimate relationship doesn't make anyone "impure" and the very fact that we have to have this discussion in the US in this day and age is so disturbing.

[gardenmom5]

  With people (especially highly educated and professional women) getting married later and later in life, why would they wait to have an intimate relationship?

 

My daughters are highly educated. (1dd excels in a male dominated field. 2dd receives a doctorate in 10 days)  and chose to wait.  My sons have chosen to wait (they're also still in college.) because to them it IS worth it.

My husband had three degrees before we married - he chose to wait. (and it wasn't for lack of opportunity.)

 

physical intimacy isn't the same thing as emotional intimacy - and emotional intimacy is far more important as well as rewarding.   but with physical intimacy - it can lead to expectations of emotional intimacy that never arise.

 

I grew up in a family that was very . . .  'free'.  my sister used BC - she also had her first pg at 15 and was pg four times before she married.  (and only because she was pg.)

my brother married twice because 'hey, we're getting it on, might as well'.  both of those marriages were complete blue flame burn outs.

so - I've seen  the negative side of doing whatever you want.   (going back a few generations actually.)

[Cammie]

I didn't mean to imply that highly educated people cannot choose to wait until marriage.  Nor did I mean to imply that emotional intimacy was less rewarding than physical intimacy.  I hope my kids find both.  And yes, relationships are difficult.  That doesn't go away after marriage.

 

It doesn't sound like your sister used her BC very well if she was pregnant four times.  That is why I think BC education is so important.

 

Your point about your brother is exactly what I was getting at.  Why did they get married?  Just because they were physcially involved.  And then the marriages were disasters.  They didn't need to get married because they were involved. 

 

Teaching young adults to navigate relationships, to respect themselves and others, to be true to themselves and to find partners who treat them well seems to me to be the most important thing.

 

 

[MaeFlowers]

Gosh, feeling like such a rebel.

 

What about teaching about birth control. So that sex before marriage won't end up with a pregnancy?

 

I didn't wait for marriage. I don't expect my children to either. With people (especially highly educated and professional women) getting married later and later in life, why would they wait to have an intimate relationship?

 

I am probably going to be scewered here...but I think that those relationships can also be casual, sometimes. And serious, sometimes. And kids should understand that a physical relationship is not the be all and end all of everything.

 

And "purity" - gah. Having an intimate relationship doesn't make anyone "impure" and the very fact that we have to have this discussion in the US in this day and age is so disturbing.

I don't know if you're replying to my post. Being that it was a Catholic school, they weren't big on teaching about BC. I was not catholic but I think the conversation was important. It made me think about what I was doing and the ramifications if bc failed. I actually plan on having a similar discussion with my dc when the time is right.

The reality is bc can and does fail. Sometimes people get carried away and fail to use it. I didn't want until marriage. I didn't even wait until I graduated high school. I don't regret it one iota. But understanding what I could possibly be getting myself into helped me behave more responsibly.

[Chris in VA]

I am not sure of any other threads on this topic but I can tell you what I was taught in Catholic school. **I** think it was effective. As far as I know, no one from our school (about 250 students) ended up pregnant before graduation.

We were basically taught to abstain but not for the reasons of purity. What I mean is, it wasn't framed in that light. We were taught the risks with the primary focus being pregnancy. For most, that is the main concern when you aren't focused on the purity side of things. We were taught about the realities of parenthood. They seriously broke it down. From the cost of prenatal vitamins and diapers to the cost of day care. The financial responsibilities, the emotional and physical responsibilities. All of it. They tried to teach us that parenthood was a BIG deal and, therefore, so was intercourse. It wasnt something you played at, you needed maturity, stability and a college education first. (Okay, not literally on the college education. But, they tried to show us how hard it would be on minimum wage high school income.) You needed to be an adult.

I am sure that some could find fault in this. But, it stuck with me and I didn't feel as though it shamed us into behaving.

I don't know if that helps any or if it even answers your question. Just my .02.

 

 

Gosh, feeling like such a rebel.

 

What about teaching about birth control.  So that sex before marriage won't end up with a pregnancy?

 

I didn't wait for marriage.  I don't expect my children to either.  With people (especially highly educated and professional women) getting married later and later in life, why would they wait to have an intimate relationship?

 

I am probably going to be scewered here...but I think that those relationships can also be casual, sometimes.  And serious, sometimes.  And kids should understand that a physical relationship is not the be all and end all of everything.

 

And "purity" - gah.  Having an intimate relationship doesn't make anyone "impure" and the very fact that we have to have this discussion in the US in this day and age is so disturbing.

 

The problem I see with this angle is that pregnancy then becomes some horrible failure.

Yes, I can see that view, in a way, but I want my children to view pregnancy as a gift. It's rather counter-cultural, and hard to see pregnancy that way, esp when there is no control over the decision to continue the pregnancy (and I'm not saying there should be, there just isn't) on the part of the man.

So, I do understand making pregnancy something to avoid if there is not a committed relationship. I just teach that the best way to do that is to not have s3x.

[regentrude]

I am not sure of any other threads on this topic but I can tell you what I was taught in Catholic school. **I** think it was effective. As far as I know, no one from our school (about 250 students) ended up pregnant before graduation.

We were basically taught to abstain but not for the reasons of purity.

 

How do you know the absence of pregnancies was a result of the abstinence teaching?

Many girls manage to avoid getting pregnant because they are conscientious about using birth control, not because they actually abstain. (And just because they went to a Catholic school that did not teach it does not mean that would have been their only resource for learning about bc)