Promise Rings? No, Vagina Sculpture!

[Zetetica]

Opinions?

Liberal Lutheran pastor melts purity rings into vagina sculpture, presents it to Gloria Steinem

 

[JohnB445]

Reminds me of the Golden Calf.

 

[bèlla]

She's controversial but I never agreed with the rings and the promise it implied. The backlash was bound to happen and they're dealing with the fallout now. Purity is no guarantee for marriage. It should have never been presented that way.

 

[ViaCrucis]

The symbolism of taking what is, in essence, a symbol of misogynistic oppression and transforming it into a piece of art for female empowerment shouldn't be lost here.

The cultural obsession with female "purity" is toxic, and has no place in Christ's Church. The facade that this is about committing oneself to wait for marriage is just that, a facade. One can choose to remain chaste until their wedding without subjecting themselves to toxic notions of "purity".

-CryptoLutheran

 

[ViaCrucis]

Reminds me of the Golden Calf.

It's not, since nobody is worshiping a statue of a vagina. Instead it is a transformation of oppressive symbols into an art piece about women's worth, dignity, and freedom to be themselves.

The thing about art is that it is highly subjective, so whether you or I consider vaginal art "good" would be outside the point; the point is what the artist was attempting to communicate.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[PloverWing]

I was married by the time the purity ring fad came along, and it was never something my parish participated in. Which means: I never realized, until reading this article, that purity rings were only for girls. Yeah, that's messed up.

I like the quote from Bolz-Weber in the article: "This thing about women that the church has tried to hide and control and that is a canvas on which other people can write their own righteousness ― it’s actually ours. This part of me is mine and I get to determine what is good for it and if it’s beautiful and how I use it in the world."

I agree with chastity as a virtue (for both men and women), but the approach of controlling and shaming women has got to go.

 

[USincognito]

The obsession with female virginity among evangelicals isn't as pathological as it is in Islam, but it really does get taken to some creepy and disempowering levels.

The creepiest manifestation are purity balls.

 

[GoldenBoy89]

The creepiest manifestation are purity balls.

Had to look this up. I thought it was some type of purity ring for men by the name of it.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

Reading up a bit on this Pastrix and it sounds like her god is Aprhodite rather than the all holy Trinity.

You might not like purity rings but melting them down into a sculpture of a Vagina is the height of modern feminist decadence. Why not a statue of the Virgin Mary? Probably because she despises the example of Mary.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Reading up a bit on this Pastrix and it sounds like her god is Aprhodite

Is that what ELCA is about? Kewl.

Also I note the article says vulva, while the article's own headline says vagina. There was a very funny article recently about a dude mansplaining these terms, but I feel sure the link would fall afoul of the rules here, so you inquiring minds will have to find it on your own.

 

[ranunculus]

The cultural obsession with female "purity" is toxic, and has no place in Christ's Church.

Don't listen to him girls, your virginity is all that makes you valuable.
If you lose it you are worthless. Your father couldn't even get a goat and 2 chickens when he sells you off to a stranger in order to strengthen diplomatic relations with that neighboring tribe you've been warring with if your hymen is no longer intact.

Sure, it's probably the case that if you do stay pure until marriage you'll still start feeling worthless after the wedding night because it's been ingrained in you from a very young age that your virginity is all that gives you any value.

But think of how much better that is than being that piece of chewed up gum that girls who are sexually active were compared to in church and in school. And the analogy is totally apt because like gum, girls' bodies are chewed up until the flavor runs out about 5 minutes in and then spit out onto the floor as an amorphous blob. It's not like you can treat sex as cardio and take a shower after and feel totally renewed.

Just remember, you are an object, belonging to your father.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

Don't listen to him girls, your virginity is all that makes you valuable.
If you lose it you are worthless. Your father couldn't even get a goat and 2 chickens when he sells you off to a stranger in order to strengthen diplomatic relations with that neighboring tribe you've been warring with if your hymen is no longer intact.

Sure, it's probably the case that if you do stay pure until marriage you'll still start feeling worthless after the wedding night because it's been ingrained in you from a very young age that your virginity is all that gives you any value.

But think of how much better that is than being that piece of chewed up gum that girls who are sexually active were compared to in church and in school. And the analogy is totally apt because like gum, girls' bodies are chewed up until the flavor runs out about 5 minutes in and then spit out onto the floor as an amorphous blob. It's not like you can treat sex as cardio and take a shower after and feel totally renewed.

Just remember, you are an object, belonging to your father.

Sorry that you live in the Middle East.

 

[Sketcher]

I've never been a fan of purity rings, but this is ridiculous and in horrible taste.

 

[USincognito]

Sorry that you live in the Middle East.

You were just subject to Poe's Law in action.

 

[ViaCrucis]

I've never been a fan of purity rings, but this is ridiculous and in horrible taste.

Art is subjective. I like what the intent was. It probably could have been done differently, but that's just straining at gnats really.

I am in favor of voices in the Church working against Purity Culture. The abuse of religion to harm others is inexcusable, and that's what Purity Culture is--religion as abuse. There are ways to advocate for the virtue of chastity without engaging in toxic religion.

In the ancient Church those who committed themselves to chastity, both men and women, were asserting and taking hold of their own sexuality, not merely following the social expectations. This is especially true for women, who were to be regarded as the belonging of their fathers until they became the property of their husbands. By committing themselves to a life of chastity and celibacy women were taking control of their bodies, their sexuality, and refusing to be servile little women to men.

The ancient stories of St. Thekla, a female companion to St. Paul in his missionary journeys according to tradition and some legends, are all about how she was a champion of female chastity, and she is regularly running afoul of men and the authorities because she was a woman who refused to just shut up and be quiet.

Empowering people, both men and women, is a good thing. We don't have to just go with the flow according to the dictates of prevailing culture. Chasity, understood rightly, is not a denial of one's sexuality, but an expression of it. And there is room in the Church for a multifaceted expression of human identity and sexuality, it is why the Church has always had married and celibate people coexisting together as part of one body.

But teaching women that they are basically property and that their self-worth depends upon whether or not they've had sex; while also teaching men that they should regard the value of women based upon their sexual status is so flagrantly disgusting and wrong.

As far as I'm concerned the melting down of purity rings is akin to King Josiah tearing down the high places. Such idols have no place.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Sketcher]

Art is subjective. I like what the intent was. It probably could have been done differently, but that's just straining at gnats really.

I am in favor of voices in the Church working against Purity Culture. The abuse of religion to harm others is inexcusable, and that's what Purity Culture is--religion as abuse. There are ways to advocate for the virtue of chastity without engaging in toxic religion.

In the ancient Church those who committed themselves to chastity, both men and women, were asserting and taking hold of their own sexuality, not merely following the social expectations. This is especially true for women, who were to be regarded as the belonging of their fathers until they became the property of their husbands. By committing themselves to a life of chastity and celibacy women were taking control of their bodies, their sexuality, and refusing to be servile little women to men.

The ancient stories of St. Thekla, a female companion to St. Paul in his missionary journeys according to tradition and some legends, are all about how she was a champion of female chastity, and she is regularly running afoul of men and the authorities because she was a woman who refused to just shut up and be quiet.

Empowering people, both men and women, is a good thing. We don't have to just go with the flow according to the dictates of prevailing culture. Chasity, understood rightly, is not a denial of one's sexuality, but an expression of it. And there is room in the Church for a multifaceted expression of human identity and sexuality, it is why the Church has always had married and celibate people coexisting together as part of one body.

But teaching women that they are basically property and that their self-worth depends upon whether or not they've had sex; while also teaching men that they should regard the value of women based upon their sexual status is so flagrantly disgusting and wrong.

As far as I'm concerned the melting down of purity rings is akin to King Josiah tearing down the high places. Such idols have no place.

-CryptoLutheran

In this case, it's melting them down into another one. You did say that no one appears to be bowing down and worshiping it, but I submit that isn't done with purity rings either. If they are idols, so is this.

Furthermore, how does a vagina-shaped sculpture promote chastity? It doesn't. The way to combat lies isn't with lies on the opposite side of the spectrum. It is to tell and promote the truth. If you shoot wide to the right, the solution isn't to shoot wide to the left. Rather, you need to hit the bull's eye.

 

[PloverWing]

Furthermore, how does a vagina-shaped sculpture promote chastity? It doesn't.

You're right: The sculpture isn't meant to express chastity. Nor is it meant to express any other particular sexual choice or activity. If I understand the artist, it's meant to express that this part of my body is mine. Sometimes that important truth is lost, as my pastor negotiates with my father and my husband about which man owns my body at which point in my life. Before any man owns my body, I own it. Now, once we all agree on that, I can talk about how I should use my body responsibly, and I think that chastity is part of that. I may well choose to share my body with a man that I choose to marry. But my body belongs to me before it belongs to everyone else, because I'm the one who lives in it, and that's what I see the artist trying to express.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

Art is subjective. I like what the intent was. It probably could have been done differently, but that's just straining at gnats really.

I am in favor of voices in the Church working against Purity Culture. The abuse of religion to harm others is inexcusable, and that's what Purity Culture is--religion as abuse. There are ways to advocate for the virtue of chastity without engaging in toxic religion.

In the ancient Church those who committed themselves to chastity, both men and women, were asserting and taking hold of their own sexuality, not merely following the social expectations. This is especially true for women, who were to be regarded as the belonging of their fathers until they became the property of their husbands. By committing themselves to a life of chastity and celibacy women were taking control of their bodies, their sexuality, and refusing to be servile little women to men.

The ancient stories of St. Thekla, a female companion to St. Paul in his missionary journeys according to tradition and some legends, are all about how she was a champion of female chastity, and she is regularly running afoul of men and the authorities because she was a woman who refused to just shut up and be quiet.

Empowering people, both men and women, is a good thing. We don't have to just go with the flow according to the dictates of prevailing culture. Chasity, understood rightly, is not a denial of one's sexuality, but an expression of it. And there is room in the Church for a multifaceted expression of human identity and sexuality, it is why the Church has always had married and celibate people coexisting together as part of one body.

But teaching women that they are basically property and that their self-worth depends upon whether or not they've had sex; while also teaching men that they should regard the value of women based upon their sexual status is so flagrantly disgusting and wrong.

As far as I'm concerned the melting down of purity rings is akin to King Josiah tearing down the high places. Such idols have no place.

-CryptoLutheran

While there is room within Christianity for different sexual expressions, are there then no limits? This Pastrix seems to advocate such a stance that as long as one is not hurt, one should be totally free to do whatever they want sexually without guilt or shame. Such 60s stance seems to me against everything Christianity has stood for over 2000 years. As does melting down an (admittedly tacky) symbol of purity and then forging it into the image of a female pleasure center.

It's more a feminist statement than it is a Christian statement.

 

[Sketcher]

You're right: The sculpture isn't meant to express chastity. Nor is it meant to express any other particular sexual choice or activity.

Then a sex organ shouldn't have been used.

If I understand the artist, it's meant to express that this part of my body is mine. Sometimes that important truth is lost, as my pastor negotiates with my father and my husband about which man owns my body at which point in my life. Before any man owns my body, I own it. Now, once we all agree on that, I can talk about how I should use my body responsibly, and I think that chastity is part of that. I may well choose to share my body with a man that I choose to marry. But my body belongs to me before it belongs to everyone else, because I'm the one who lives in it, and that's what I see the artist trying to express.

For Christians, our bodies belong to God, not us (1 Cor 6:19-20). His will before our will.

 

[ViaCrucis]

While there is room within Christianity for different sexual expressions, are there then no limits? This Pastrix seems to advocate such a stance that as long as one is not hurt, one should be totally free to do whatever they want sexually without guilt or shame. Such 60s stance seems to me against everything Christianity has stood for over 2000 years. As does melting down an (admittedly tacky) symbol of purity and then forging it into the image of a female pleasure center.

It's more a feminist statement than it is a Christian statement.

I'm not about promoting licentiousness or hedonism, such is just as toxic. I don't know what Pastor Bolz-Weber is all about, so I can't comment on her views.

I believe there is a healthy way to talk about sexuality that doesn't go to either extreme.

-CryptoLutheran