Why are there no son- mother purity balls?

[Waiting for the Verdict]

Well, can anyone explain this to me? Why don't Christian men pledge to keep it in their pants, and pledge so to their mothers?

Just curious.

 

[Steezie]

Because dancing with your mother is just EEEWWW!!!

But seriously I dont know. I think the whole Purity Ball thing is twisted no matter which way you slice it.

 

[Arnold_Philips]

Chastity is more of a virtue for women than men, it seems. This basically translates to more control of women, which isn't surprising.

 

[PassionFruit]

They're not called 'purity balls' they're called 'integrity balls'. With mothers and sons.

http://www.dakotavoice.com/200701/20070115_1.html

Still disturbing.

 

[KarateCowboy]

Chastity is more of a virtue for women than men, it seems. This basically translates to more control of women, which isn't surprising.

Yeah, and choice is more of a woman's right than a mans, which basically translates to extra rights for women, which isn't surprising.

 

[PassionFruit]

Yeah, and choice is more of a woman's right than a mans, which basically translates to extra rights for women, which isn't surprising.

No, it doesn't.

 

[ChristianCenturion]

Well, can anyone explain this to me? Why don't Christian men pledge to keep it in their pants, and pledge so to their mothers?

Just curious.

From what I could tell, you've already shared in the other thread that you, along with others, have difficulty understanding the whole concept - thus your asking questions. I don't see where making way too many assumptions on the other side of the topic has done much good in clearing things up for you here in this OP.

As for the whole purity concept - purity is a spiritual issue. There are still households that have the man leading the way in spiritual matters. So while a mother may play out her role in raising up a child to value purity, it isn't the either/or of her job and nobody else's.

 

[christalee4]

Why is it perceived as being more important that girls be virgins than young men? It's cross-cultural. Because men need proof that the girls have not been previously "defiled" by another? Objectification of women, in that previously "used" means not "fresh"? Proof that it's their baby, and not another's?

 

[Steezie]

From what I could tell, you've already shared in the other thread that you, along with others, have difficulty understanding the whole concept - thus your asking questions. I don't see where making way too many assumptions on the other side of the topic has done much good in clearing things up for you here in this OP.

He was remarking on the paradox of having purity balls for women but not for men, as if women were expected to remain chaste but men were exempt

 

[ChristianCenturion]

He was remarking on the paradox of having purity balls for women but not for men, as if women were expected to remain chaste but men were exempt

I read it and now yours.
That doesn't make the presuppositions found in either disappear.

 

[Waiting for the Verdict]

I read it and now yours.
That doesn't make the presuppositions found in either disappear.

What presuppositions? My family is composed exclusively of conservative evangelicals and they are horrified at the idea of purity balls. I just don't want people labeling mainstream conservative evangelicals in the same category with movements like the purity ball movement.

A.K.A. I WAS TRYING TO PROTECT EVANGELICALS, NOT CONDEMN THEM.

 

[christalee4]

They're not called 'purity balls' they're called 'integrity balls'. With mothers and sons.

http://www.dakotavoice.com/200701/20070115_1.html

Still disturbing.

One presumes the goal is the same, but by the difference in defining what's more important for each gender - boys=integrity, girls=purity, there is a difference in standards. But that's not new. The age-old assumption that boys will be boys, that boys have "certain needs", that boys find it harder to control themselves, versus, girls are either virgins or streetwalkers, men are players, whereas women are "hos", is as old as recorded history. Double standard implies privilege for one sex, and weakness of character for another.

 

[Waiting for the Verdict]

Notice that the integrity ball was the first of its kind and only happened after numerous purity balls.

Hmmm.

 

[ChristianCenturion]

What presuppositions? My family is composed exclusively of conservative evangelicals and they are horrified at the idea of purity balls. I just don't want people labeling mainstream conservative evangelicals in the same category with movements like the purity ball movement.

A.K.A. I WAS TRYING TO PROTECT EVANGELICALS, NOT CONDEMN THEM.

I'm a Christian evangelical conservative. I don't see how an Atheist presuming to speak for entire group of mainstream Christian, evangelical, or conservative on the basis of his/her family being any more reliable than the earlier begged questions and failure to represent the method. There is such a thing as letting those that represent their selves... represent their selves. It saves one from making a mistake in misrepresentation.
It would also probably be more convincing if there was a demonstration that the concept was understood before trying to speak on it. So far, all that has been shown are presumptions and a lack of representation.

 

[Mling]

Here's what I see:

People on the "pro" side of these celebrations are saying that they are about teaching moral values, abstinence and other such things.

People who don't like them recognize the value of teaching such things, or acknowledge the freedom of parents to do so, but think that the balls themselves are creepy, because they feel they have a somewhat incestuous tone (among other reasons).

Given that many, if not most, people are most comfortable discussing sexual matters with somebody of the same sex,

given that homosexual impulses would never be celebrated by the crowd of people who would be participating in these things,

and given the argument that this is solely about "purity" or "integrity" and that there is nothing creepy about them,

it seems perfectly reasonable that there would be mother/daughter or father/son celebrations of purity and integrity, that follow the same pattern. Are there? Do girls in these communities make vows of fidelity to their mothers, in which their mothers are essentially given ownership of their sexuality? Do boys surrender control of their body over to their fathers?

I'm especially interested in the latter case, because it is both more reasonable--with the father as the "head of house," the son has more reason to vow to him, rather than to his mother--and because, if there are any sexual overtones to this, they would most likely come out in response to the suggestion of a male/male pairing.

So...links? Experiences? Do such things exist?

 

[ChristianCenturion]

Notice that the integrity ball was the first of its kind and only happened after numerous purity balls.

Hmmm.

Umm... integrity and/or purity has had and does have more than one teaching method. Basing all opinion on only one such teaching method only demonstrates more of that lack of knowledge.
You might want to google integrity, men, children, fathers or any combination desired and check out just how many Christian methods or contemporary teaching outlines there are.

 

[ChristianCenturion]

Here's what I see:

People on the "pro" side of these celebrations are saying that they are about teaching moral values, abstinence and other such things.

People who don't like them recognize the value of teaching such things, or acknowledge the freedom of parents to do so, but think that the balls themselves are creepy, because they feel they have a somewhat incestuous tone (among other reasons).

Given that many, if not most, people are most comfortable discussing sexual matters with somebody of the same sex,

given that homosexual impulses would never be celebrated by the crowd of people who would be participating in these things,

and given the argument that this is solely about "purity" or "integrity" and that there is nothing creepy about them,

it seems perfectly reasonable that there would be mother/daughter or father/son celebrations of purity and integrity, that follow the same pattern. Are there? Do girls in these communities make vows of fidelity to their mothers, in which their mothers are essentially given ownership of their sexuality? Do boys surrender control of their body over to their fathers?

I'm especially interested in the latter case, because it is both more reasonable--with the father as the "head of house," the son has more reason to vow to him, rather than to his mother--and because, if there are any sexual overtones to this, they would most likely come out in response to the suggestion of a male/male pairing.

So...links? Experiences? Do such things exist?

One of the larger and obvious misunderstandings inserted in a few of the posts in both threads have been the Either/Or issue. If there is a mother and a father, both have their unique role in raising the child. The father representing the male component and the mother representing the female component for either a son or a daughter gives it a holistic approach.

 

[Waiting for the Verdict]

Umm... integrity and/or purity has had and does have more than one teaching method. Basing all opinion on only one such teaching method only demonstrates more of that lack of knowledge.
You might want to google integrity, men, children, fathers or any combination desired and check out just how many Christian methods or contemporary teaching outlines there are.

If you actually bothered to read my other thread, you'll notice I have no problem with the concept of purity. I was protesting specifically the courtship movement and purity balls. I was not protesting Promisekeepers, or any of the various other Christian men's organizations and methods out there. Having sat through Christian men's ministries on many occassions, and avoided them on many others, I think I'm qualified to speak on them.

 

[ChristianCenturion]

If you actually bothered to read my other thread, you'll notice I have no problem with the concept of purity. I was protesting specifically the courtship movement and purity balls. I was not protesting Promisekeepers, or any of the various other Christian men's organizations and methods out there. Having sat through Christian men's ministries on many occassions, and avoided them on many others, I think I'm qualified to speak on them.

Speaking on a topic and speaking for a topic was a key difference in my earlier post.

 

[beechy]

Yeah, and choice is more of a woman's right than a mans, which basically translates to extra rights for women, which isn't surprising.

I'm guessing you mean a woman's right to choose whether or not to abort a pregnancy. Last I checked a woman cannot choose for a man to be pregnant in her stead, but as soon as that happens I'm sure the playing field of "rights" will be leveled accordingly.