minding my own business, and I hit on a post that talks about this thing called the Purity Ball. Daddy takes control of daughter's vagina until he hands it over to her husband - woman as property, unable to make a decision about her own body. It doesn't get much plainer than this, folks. Digby analyzes the jewelry they are peddling. Do read the comments, they are funny and sharp. And scary as hell. This isn't about responsible sexual behavior, it's about reducing women to chattel.
We didn't stop being chattel that long ago, folks. When my husband and I bought a house in NC in the early 90s, we went to the closing table to find that the deed was to "My Husbandsname, et ux." I told them to walk their happy asses back to the computer and put MY NAME on the deed, because the only place my name appeared was on the goddamn mortgage and if I was responsible for paying for this property, I did not expect to have to prove that I was its owner by proving I was my husband's wife. They apparently didn't deal with too many uppity bitches like me, but they did it. I am still shaking my head. For those who don't know antiquated Latinate legalese that nobody in the legal profession still used at the end of the 20th century, "et ux." is "and wife." This was in 1992! Florida had done away with this and updated its legalese to plain English and recognized that women have NAMES back in the 70s, but referring to a married woman as "and wife" as if she's his property without an identity of her own was still alive and well in NC. (It may be to this day, I don't know.) It was my first clue that I wasn't cut out for living in North Carolina.
But back to the Purity Ball - I'm sorry, I was raised Catholic and I thought we did sexual repression to the nth degree, but early-70s Catholics were wildly progressive compared to this! This is just so perverse on so many levels, it boggles the mind. On the "purest" level (heh) - and I'm trying very hard to ignore the creepy incestuous angle of a father owning his daughter's sexuality until he "gives it" to its new owner, the theme is simple - women aren't capable of making their own decisions, they are owned by their fathers and then handed off to husbands. Because those menfolk know what's best for us.
Every time I hear a young thing say, "Oh, I'm not a feminist..." followed by the "but" of "but I expect to have control over my own destiny," I want to shake the child. This is how it was. They're baaaack....
I think that a lot of young women my age (college-ish) don't hear enough about how we're really not that far from the days when women were property and substandard to men and all that. Because knowing that makes me very aware and very careful of all these laws people are trying to pass and somewhat cult-ish rituals people are doing that will bring us back to a primitive state. Anyway, thanks sharing your experiences; I hope it enlightens some people.
ReplyDelete- Kwu
I see girls I work with just taking it for granted that our construction company is loaded with female managers and women are out in the field making decisions about moving dirt and desigining the community and the like. They have no idea how freaking awesome it is. To me it's a natural thing - women SHOULD design tot lots and pick the equipment and decide to save that big shady tree so we can put benches under it - but it's still a really recent, within my career (and I'm not ancient) level of achievement. College-age girls need to keep in mind that their mothers and sometimes grandmothers went through a lot of crap to get to this point and enjoy it and not take it for granted. What we achieved can be taken away through complacency. Give your vagina to Daddy.... Eeew.
ReplyDeleteAmazing.
ReplyDeleteArghghg... I'm so tired of all the fundamentalists and extremists - they are troublemakers with a capital T.
Ugh. Not only do we have the whole "women as chattel" thing, but promising virginity exclusively to Daddy rather than, say, Mommy and Daddy smacks of incest. Yeek.
ReplyDelete"The high priest of my family?"
ReplyDeleteShades of "The Handmaid's Tale".
Margartet Atwood is a prophet.
This creeps me out beyond words. It does smack of incest. The idea that daddy owns your virginity is just icky, to say nothing of very degrading.
ReplyDeleteYou know, I could almost support a Repub candidtate if it were someone who was non-religious, and broke the stranglehold the Conservative Christians have on the party. As long as they are pro-choice, you know. And, I probably wouldn't vote for them. But I still wish they could find someone.
It is very creepy on so many levels - and I did note that mommy is absent from this process. The entire concept of pledging your sexuality to Daddy's control, posing for pictures like a "couple" under an archway, reading "vows" - between the inappropriately "romantic" staging of the event to the concept of "daddy as high priest," it's all extremely twisted. And yes, these are the people the Republicans cater to - just to get their votes, of course, do you think anybody in BushCo actually believes this stuff? You know the Bush twins didn't stand under any archway and take a vow to Daddy!
ReplyDeleteOnce upon a time, it was actually possible to pick local candidates based on their actual positions and qualifications - then the Republican machine took over in the past two decades, and a sameness kicked in among all their candidates. It's easy to mock the Democrats for being all over the map, but damn, at least they represent diversity and you can pick and choose among them based on how much you agree. Republicans have put a machine in place that created a lockstep, mindless herd of yes men and women. If McCain is their idea of a maverick, Sheeesh!
ReplyDelete