This country is just loony tunes

So I grew up in quite a liberal household. I'm not exaggerating here - I cannot comprehend what is behind the demonisation of sex and why it is so damn important to these people. My best guess is that women are seen as some sort of sub-species. Am I on the right track?

Women are seen as possessions. And possessions of men, because in the past only men were allowed to own anything.  So women are kept pure and chaste by their fathers, until he "gives them away" to another man.  To celebrate this the woman is all done up in pure white and the whole process takes place in a church.

In this narrative that stems from the church, sex is something unmentionable that men like to have. Women of course being all pure dont like sex. So it is not talked about much, and when the father gives his daughter to the other man he is saying it is now Ok for her to have sex because you now own her. I have given her to you. She is yours to do with what you want.

So any woman who likes sex or who trades in sex is outside what a "good" woman should be. And perish the thought that she would have sex with someone to whom she had not been "given."

It is taking the power away from the men.

It is all about power. As is the teachings of most religions, where threats and intimidation, burn in hell etc are used to keep people (the peasants) in line.  And it was usually only strictly controlled with the peasants because there are of course numerous cases in history where the ruling classes didn't adhere to what the church said or wanted.

The Arabic religions, as well as the fundamentalist religions in the USA apparently haven't caught up with the notion that WOMEN ARE NOT POSSESSIONS. That MEN DON'T OWN WOMEN.

I could go on but there really is a PHD in this stuff.

 

So I grew up in quite a liberal household. I'm not exaggerating here - I cannot comprehend what is behind the demonisation of sex and why it is so damn important to these people. My best guess is that women are seen as some sort of sub-species. Am I on the right track?

Women are seen as possessions. And possessions of men, because in the past only men were allowed to own anything.  So women are kept pure and chaste by their fathers, until he "gives them away" to another man.  To celebrate this the woman is all done up in pure white and the whole process takes place in a church.

In this narrative that stems from the church, sex is something unmentionable that men like to have. Women of course being all pure dont like sex. So it is not talked about much, and when the father gives his daughter to the other man he is saying it is now Ok for her to have sex because you now own her. I have given her to you. She is yours to do with what you want.

So any woman who likes sex or who trades in sex is outside what a "good" woman should be. And perish the thought that she would have sex with someone to whom she had not been "given."

It is taking the power away from the men.

It is all about power. As is the teachings of most religions, where threats and intimidation, burn in hell etc are used to keep people (the peasants) in line.  And it was usually only strictly controlled with the peasants because there are of course numerous cases in history where the ruling classes didn't adhere to what the church said or wanted.

The Arabic religions, as well as the fundamentalist religions in the USA apparently haven't caught up with the notion that WOMEN ARE NOT POSSESSIONS. That MEN DON'T OWN WOMEN.

I could go on but there really is a PHD in this stuff.

 

Very simplistic and not entirely true, although there are aspects of this which is correct.  Generalisations seem to sprout very easily from all aspects of society.
Not all men who hold to this belief do so out of a "power position" nor do they think only their daughters (or women in general) purity is all that matters and nor do they believe that the women in their lives are "theirs and they own them" in the sense being offered.
The Bible does teach that a wife's body is not her own, it belongs to the husband, but then it turns around and states that a husband's body is not his own it belongs to the wife.  The topic though is that it is wrong to withhold sexual activity from your partner as some sort of power control to get them doing what you want, we should be sharing in each others lives physically and sexually out of love and for love and mutual satisfaction.  Sadly though people are people and will take that and use it for their own perverted power trip means. It is not what Paul is teaching though.
That's just one example and shows how people pervert what is being taught for their own selfish reasons.

So I grew up in quite a liberal household. I'm not exaggerating here - I cannot comprehend what is behind the demonisation of sex and why it is so damn important to these people. My best guess is that women are seen as some sort of sub-species. Am I on the right track?

Women are seen as possessions. And possessions of men, because in the past only men were allowed to own anything.  So women are kept pure and chaste by their fathers, until he "gives them away" to another man.  To celebrate this the woman is all done up in pure white and the whole process takes place in a church.
In this narrative that stems from the church, sex is something unmentionable that men like to have. Women of course being all pure dont like sex. So it is not talked about much, and when the father gives his daughter to the other man he is saying it is now Ok for her to have sex because you now own her. I have given her to you. She is yours to do with what you want.
So any woman who likes sex or who trades in sex is outside what a "good" woman should be. And perish the thought that she would have sex with someone to whom she had not been "given."
It is taking the power away from the men.
It is all about power. As is the teachings of most religions, where threats and intimidation, burn in hell etc are used to keep people (the peasants) in line.  And it was usually only strictly controlled with the peasants because there are of course numerous cases in history where the ruling classes didn't adhere to what the church said or wanted.
The Arabic religions, as well as the fundamentalist religions in the USA apparently haven't caught up with the notion that WOMEN ARE NOT POSSESSIONS. That MEN DON'T OWN WOMEN.
I could go on but there really is a PHD in this stuff.
Very simplistic and not entirely true, although there are aspects of this which is correct.  Generalisations seem to sprout very easily from all aspects of society.
Not all men who hold to this belief do so out of a "power position" nor do they think only their daughters (or women in general) purity is all that matters and nor do they believe that the women in their lives are "theirs and they own them" in the sense being offered.
The Bible does teach that a wife's body is not her own, it belongs to the husband, but then it turns around and states that a husband's body is not his own it belongs to the wife.  The topic though is that it is wrong to withhold sexual activity from your partner as some sort of power control to get them doing what you want, we should be sharing in each others lives physically and sexually out of love and for love and mutual satisfaction.  Sadly though people are people and will take that and use it for their own perverted power trip means. It is not what Paul is teaching though.
That's just one example and shows how people pervert what is being taught for their own selfish reasons.

So I grew up in quite a liberal household. I'm not exaggerating here - I cannot comprehend what is behind the demonisation of sex and why it is so damn important to these people. My best guess is that women are seen as some sort of sub-species. Am I on the right track?

Women are seen as possessions. And possessions of men, because in the past only men were allowed to own anything.  So women are kept pure and chaste by their fathers, until he "gives them away" to another man.  To celebrate this the woman is all done up in pure white and the whole process takes place in a church.
In this narrative that stems from the church, sex is something unmentionable that men like to have. Women of course being all pure dont like sex. So it is not talked about much, and when the father gives his daughter to the other man he is saying it is now Ok for her to have sex because you now own her. I have given her to you. She is yours to do with what you want.
So any woman who likes sex or who trades in sex is outside what a "good" woman should be. And perish the thought that she would have sex with someone to whom she had not been "given."
It is taking the power away from the men.
It is all about power. As is the teachings of most religions, where threats and intimidation, burn in hell etc are used to keep people (the peasants) in line.  And it was usually only strictly controlled with the peasants because there are of course numerous cases in history where the ruling classes didn't adhere to what the church said or wanted.
The Arabic religions, as well as the fundamentalist religions in the USA apparently haven't caught up with the notion that WOMEN ARE NOT POSSESSIONS. That MEN DON'T OWN WOMEN.
I could go on but there really is a PHD in this stuff.
Very simplistic and not entirely true, although there are aspects of this which is correct.  Generalisations seem to sprout very easily from all aspects of society.
Not all men who hold to this belief do so out of a "power position" nor do they think only their daughters (or women in general) purity is all that matters and nor do they believe that the women in their lives are "theirs and they own them" in the sense being offered.
The Bible does teach that a wife's body is not her own, it belongs to the husband, but then it turns around and states that a husband's body is not his own it belongs to the wife.  The topic though is that it is wrong to withhold sexual activity from your partner as some sort of power control to get them doing what you want, we should be sharing in each others lives physically and sexually out of love and for love and mutual satisfaction.  Sadly though people are people and will take that and use it for their own perverted power trip means. It is not what Paul is teaching though.
That's just one example and shows how people pervert what is being taught for their own selfish reasons.

Firstly everything that the women's rights movement was about stems from possession and ownership. As soon as you got married you went from being your fathers daughter to your husbands wife. And if you wanted to do something, buy many things, you needed their permission.
Secondly It wasn't only the bible that talks about ownership of bodies. The law did as well until about 30 years ago which is why a woman who was separated from her husband couldn't suffer rape. He could break in assault her, rape her and get away with it because it was his right under the law. He owned the rights to her body.
And the concept of ownership still exists. People today have children and believe that they own them. You don't own your children. They are individuals in their own right, with rights. Same with women.
And what those fathers in the USA are doing is putting a ridiculous amount of pressure on their daughters. And it's not about sex or not, it's about absolutes. Because when you put that pressure on a child it is like telling them that they have to get 100% for every subject at school. There is no room for any less than 100% There is no concept of not doing as well as you wanted. It's either stay pure or suffer the consequences which are so dire as to be draconian.
That to me is just a form of child abuse. I don't blame the fathers they don't know any better and no doubt they are acting for all the right reasons. But they are demanding a standard for their daughters that they won't demand for their sons. And they are demanding a standard which some children will find impossible to keep. And they may then suffer more damage from the psychological fallout than from act itself.

Yes i understand all of that Scorpio but you are delving into far too many generalisations about how Christianity as a whole sees the view.  Just because a few see it one way does not mean the whole does and nor does every branch of Christianity see it the same.  An example is Catholics verses Protestant, their views do widely differ on many things.

As I said though, I don't disagree with all that you have said, there are many who do behave that way, I am just addressing your generalisation of the issue.

If only it was that easy to keep daughters from putting themselves at risk of unplanned pregnancy or STD's.

 

Things are changing as religion is slowly being seen for the falsehood that it is by the wider community. This is reflected in religion being slowly removed from government education programs and things like volution and sex education becoming more prevalent.

 

I believe that marriage is a usefull structure within modern society, but I see it as a committment between 2 people infront of their friends and family (foremost), and then in front of the government or their 'church'. The government or the church don't make it any more relevant or solemn in my opinion, nor magical.

 

As young men and women become better educated they are learning that sexual relationships can be healthy and fulfilling without the fear, anxiety, STD's and pregnancy that was once consideredpart and parcel.

 

No, I don't have a daughter but if I do I will be trying to educate her as best I can, to set goals and make the right decisions, and how to recover from poor decisions. If she never gets married that's fine, and if she wants to leave her ■■■■■■■■ boyfriend thats fine too.

Yes i understand all of that Scorpio but you are delving into far too many generalisations about how Christianity as a whole sees the view.  Just because a few see it one way does not mean the whole does and nor does every branch of Christianity see it the same.  An example is Catholics verses Protestant, their views do widely differ on many things.
As I said though, I don't disagree with all that you have said, there are many who do behave that way, I am just addressing your generalisation of the issue.


You have made a few generalisations yourself.
For example saying Protestants have different views to Catholics is not technically correct. Yeah sure some branches do but not all.

[quote name=“IceTemple” post=“191334” timestamp=“1399617514”]Yes i understand all of that Scorpio but you are delving into far too many generalisations about how Christianity as a whole sees the view.  Just because a few see it one way does not mean the whole does and nor does every branch of Christianity see it the same.  An example is Catholics verses Protestant, their views do widely differ on many things.

As I said though, I don’t disagree with all that you have said, there are many who do behave that way, I am just addressing your generalisation of the issue.[/quote]

[quote name=“IceTemple” post=“191334” timestamp=“1399617514”]Yes i understand all of that Scorpio but you are delving into far too many generalisations about how Christianity as a whole sees the view.  Just because a few see it one way does not mean the whole does and nor does every branch of Christianity see it the same.  An example is Catholics verses Protestant, their views do widely differ on many things.

As I said though, I don’t disagree with all that you have said, there are many who do behave that way, I am just addressing your generalisation of the issue.[/

Religion is only a very minor part of what I am talking about. I am talking about the law, the systematic manner in which the law was used to deny women any rights at all apart from those they gained by belonging, literally to a man.

And that is what you clearly cannot see.

And society reinforced those laws, they were after all enacted by men.

If only it was that easy to keep daughters from putting themselves at risk of unplanned pregnancy or STD's.
 
Things are changing as religion is slowly being seen for the falsehood that it is by the wider community. This is reflected in religion being slowly removed from government education programs and things like volution and sex education becoming more prevalent.
 
I believe that marriage is a usefull structure within modern society, but I see it as a committment between 2 people infront of their friends and family (foremost), and then in front of the government or their 'church'. The government or the church don't make it any more relevant or solemn in my opinion, nor magical.
 
As young men and women become better educated they are learning that sexual relationships can be healthy and fulfilling without the fear, anxiety, STD's and pregnancy that was once consideredpart and parcel.
 
No, I don't have a daughter but if I do I will be trying to educate her as best I can, to set goals and make the right decisions, and how to recover from poor decisions. If she never gets married that's fine, and if she wants to leave her ■■■■■■■■ boyfriend thats fine too.


And if you have sons it's even more important that you educate them so they don't become those ■■■■■■■■ boyfriends. I have sons and I was on them like a ton of bricks if they said anything derogatory about any woman/girl solely because of their gender.
Plenty of parents educate their daughters, hence the start of this thread, for whichever way you want to look at it. But you have to educate sons as well, about the role women play and the roles they should be Able to play. If these fathers are going to have those expectations of their daughters then they should have similar expectations of their sons. Because at the end of the day these fathers are after respect for their children.
If only more people read history, if only more people spoke to and listened their elderly relatives we might have a much greater understanding of just how far we gave come, and how hard the fight has been.

 

Purity balls, Plan B and bad sex policy: inside America's virginity obsession

 

We are teaching girls that their virginity makes them special. But we're also sending the wrong message – that without their virginity, they're damaged goods

d85a1dd4-e29a-4784-a78c-d634958f0768-460

 

'I have unconventional dreams for my children,' says Antonio Sa, pictured at left with his daughters in Colorado Springs, Colorado. At right, 11-year-old Jenna Clark with her father, Jeff, in Chandler, Arizona. Photographs: David Magnusson

The men and girls in the photos hold hands and embrace – the young women are in long white dresses, the men in suits or military regalia. If some of the girls in the pictures weren't so young - Laila and Maya Sa up there are seven and five years old, respectively - the portraits could be mistaken for wedding or prom pictures. What they actually capture, though, are images of those who participate in purity balls – father-daughter dances featuring girls who pledge to remain virgins until marriage and fathers who promise to protect their daughters' chastity.

The images from Swedish photographer David Magnusson's new book, Purity, are beautiful, disturbing and tell a distinctly American story – a story wherein a girl's virginity is held up as a moral ideal above all else, a story in which the most important characteristic of a young woman is whether or not she is sexually active. This narrative of good girls and bad girls, pure girls and dirty girls, is one that follows young women throughout their lives. Purity balls simply lay that dichotomy bare. In a clip from a Nightline Prime episode on these disconcerting events , a father tells his braces-clad daughter, "You are married to the Lord, and your father is your boyfriend." (Update: As part of a purity event over the weekend sponsored by the Las Vegas police department, one of its officers told girls that if they had pre-marital sex they would end up rape victims, gang members, drug addicts or prostitutes.)

While it would be easy to dismiss purity balls as fringe – most American fathers don't require their daughters to pledge their virginity in an elaborate ceremony – the paternalism and fear of female sexuality underlying the events are present throughout American culture. (I wrote about this phenomenon in my 2009 book, The Purity Myth: How America's Obsession with Virginity is Hurting Young Women.)

The idea of girls' chastity as a mobilizing force in culture and politics may feel like a throwback, but it's something that still tangibly impacts thousands upon thousands of modern women – even through policy.

For example, it took the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) years to approve emergency contraception – also known as Plan B – for over-the-counter status. Why? Because of fears that teenage girls would become promiscuous. An internal memo showed that Janet Woodcock of the FDA was concerned that increased access to the contraceptive could cause "extreme promiscuous behaviors such as the medication taking on an 'urban legend' status that would lead adolescents to form sex-based cults centered around the use of Plan B."

Yes, teen sex cults.

When the FDA finally did recommend Plan B become available on pharmacy shelves, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius publicly overturned the agency's decision. When President Obama voiced his support for the unprecedented move, he invoked fatherhood and protectionism: "As the father of two young daughters, I think it is important for us to make sure we apply some common sense to various rules when it comes to over-the-counter medicine." Apparently fatherly concern was meant to trump science. As Ann Friedman wrote last year at New York magazine, "Obama may be setting policies based on his preteen daughters, but all women have to live with the consequences."

American paternalism and patriarchy also reared its head recently when Harvard professor Dr Kimberly Theidon filed a discrimination suit against the college, claiming she was denied tenure because of her work supporting sexual assault victims. (Harvard is one of the 55 colleges and universities named by the Education Department on Thursday as currently under federal investigation for mishandling sexual violence and harassment on campus.) Theidon alleges she was told numerous times to be a "dutiful daughter" if she wanted to succeed at the college.

dbbe8165-609a-40d0-9d24-e5feb02aebcb-460

 

'I realize that my biggest dream is to go to France, and I can't do that if I get pregnant before marriage,' says Erin Hope Smallwood, 13, pictured at left with her father, Jay, in Haughton, Louisiana. At right in Tuscon, Arizona, 17-year-old Nicole Roosma and her father, Will. 'With everything being about sex through the culture and around us,' she says, 'it's especially hard for my generation to keep a promise like this.' Photographs: David Magnusson

Magnusson says he hopes his pictures elicit empathy,not judgment:

As I learnt more, I understood that the fathers, like all parents, simply wanted to protect the ones that they love – in the best way they know how.

I have no doubt that families who participate in purity balls are doing what they think is best for their children – but that doesn't make them any less wrong. When we teach girls that their virginity makes them special and valuable, we're sending the simultaneous message that without their virginity they are tainted and damaged.

Take Elizabeth Smart – now an activist against child abuse and sexual exploitation – who was kidnapped when she was 14, raped and held for nine months before she escaped. At a forum last year, Smart talked about the way that abstinence-only education made her feel "dirty and filthy" after she was raped. "That's how easy it is to feel like you no longer have worth, you no longer have value. Why would it even be worth screaming out? Why would it even make a difference if you are rescued? Your life still has no value."

But our lives do have value, whether we're "chaste" or not. Too bad there's no party for that.

 

 

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/may/05/purity-balls-america-virginity-obsession

 

 

I wouldn't call the entire Country loony, the Religion right is certainly loony.

 

They have had elected officials on the right, say the first amendment was only for Christians lol.

It's pretty simple. Most kids are going to experiment with sex. You cannot call a girl a slapper and pat a boy on the back for the same behaviour. No matter what your beliefs, that is just wrong. And to ask a child to pledge to attempt to defy nature for your personal beliefs is abuse to my mind.

It's pretty simple. Most kids are going to experiment with sex. You cannot call a girl a slapper and pat a boy on the back for the same behaviour. No matter what your beliefs, that is just wrong. And to ask a child to pledge to attempt to defy nature for your personal beliefs is abuse to my mind.


Problem is Reboot they don't just call them a slapper. They teach girls that they have failed in life, that they are forever soiled. Just as Elizabeth Smart says they no longer have value.
Now there is a young woman to be truly admired. Not because she survived, but because she is using her dreadful experience to help others.

I recently attended a wedding where the bride, groom and their friends have a 'chastity' pact.

 

Every speech seemed to revolve around sex. Even from the parents.

 

Funny how those who choose not to have sex are so obsessed by it.

I think not getting that release for years is probably detrimental to sanity and thought patterns. 

 

Oh, wait, I'm being silly. Other groups who deprive themselves of sex, like say priests, have always been fine.