I largely consider myself to be a feminist. Among the gender-related issues that feminism explores, gender roles and sexuality play a large part. So, the concept of virginity and purity rings, with regards to how society views them, is something I have been thinking about for a good amount of time.
Much like a decent handful of other American girls, I was raised in a Christian household, more specifically a Roman Catholic household, and also attended Catholic school (AKA hell on earth) for nine years of my childhood. Now, being brought up in this background meant that I was exposed to a bunch of religious traditions, many of which were divided in terms of gender. For the most part, the Catholic church has tried to merge gender roles over the past few decades, speaking in a more collective sense of community and promoting both men and women as followers of Christ instead of just putting the men on a pedestal like other monotheistic religions have done and still tend to do. But it was only after I moved away from Catholicism that I realized how many of the traditions were still rooted in harmful sexism. And one of the weirdest traditions was not really a tradition, but more of a "Christian fad" if you will: the purity ring.
For those of you who don't know (I'll assume you were raised in a liberal household), purity rings are silver bands given to young girls that are basically a declaration of how they will hold onto their virginity until marriage. Usually, they are given from fathers to their daughters. Initially, this wouldn't be an issue for me. But considering the problem I have with the entire social construct of "virginity", I have realized how much I disagree with this concept, especially after seeing how girls would walk around with them and claim to be "pure" when their lives made this type of statement a complete hypocrisy. I am referring to the fact that there are still many girls who translate "purity" to mean "good" or "free of fault", not sexually abstinent. It was an act of moral high ground, if you will, pitting the "pure" girls against the "dirty" girls by activating their internalized misogyny through slut-shaming (AKA the exact opposite of feminism). Purity rings have become more of a social status than based in actual faith or Catholic integrity, but that doesn't make them any less creepy.
Now, as a disclaimer, I am not outright insulting or degrading any woman who wants to wear one (I'll be honest: my sister wears one herself). If that's your choosing and your parents didn't push you into it, go right ahead. I do, however, have a few observations regarding this "manifestation of morality" if you will.
One: the idea that daughters pledge themselves to their fathers is inherently sexist because it treats women as property. I get that fathers want to protect their daughters from being taken advantage of. But at the same time, locking her up in an ivory tower until marriage will not stop the world from getting in. If anything, it will make her more curious and more likely to act deviant. And yes, although many of the pro-purity ring people argue that it is the girls, not the dads, who usually bring up the topic of "pledging their purity", in reality it disempowers them because it appears that a man still "owns" your right to have sex, so basically he owns your body like an object. (Yes, I see an abortion argument branching off of this, but let's stay focused here.) And this only ensures that our culture will continue to be stuck in Biblical times.
Two: Virginity is in itself a harmful, sexist, and even dangerous social construct. By insinuating that a woman somehow has less value once she has been "used", it further promotes the chauvinist concept of viewing women as property, as something to be owned, bought, and sold like livestock. And I'm sure that you are just as infuriated as I am that this concept still fucking exists. In many Middle Eastern countries, this concept is so widespread that women engaging in premarital sex (or otherwise missing their hymen) are literally paying for operations to restore their hymen in order to avoid any legal action against them, or even severe punishment or death, in case their husband discovers that he didn't get what his father-in-law paid for him to take off of his hands. Nevermind that some girls are born without a hymen. Nevermind that you can break it by something as simple as putting in a tampon or riding a bike. I guess that women who are forced to conform to this kind of sexism should learn that it is their responsibility to make sure men are properly satisfied with the "goods" that the women also have no say in whatsoever. Screw having control over your own body: that shit is public property, you vagina-with-a-head! Don't you know that??
Three: There still exists the major divide in the sexual roles between men and women. Why are purity rings and abstinence stressed for girls, but not for boys? Sure, purity rings exist for guys, but can you name any teenage boy that you have ever seen wearing one? Unless you live in Utah or Colorado, probably not. I mean, we had plenty of boys in the youth group at my church and I never saw a single one of them wear a purity ring. But when it came to the girls in my church? Hell, they were all over the place. And it is here that I present another issue: men are promoted as the conquerers, the dominant gender, the ones who are expected to sleep with as many girls as possible to maintain a high social status. The girls are required to be submissive, conforming, but also pure and innocent. How do those concepts coincide? If the girls are supposed to remain pure, then who are all those boys supposed to have sex with? Well, obviously a woman, because she has to put out at some point to avoid being called a prude. But as soon as that happens, oh no: she's suddenly a slut! And if any of this sexism makes you mad, well then I guess you shouldn't have been born a woman! That's your own damn fault, apparently; shame on you for having no control over whether or not you are born with a penis!
Again, I don't really care if you get a purity ring. Honestly, I don't. I have no control over your life, and I don't desire any. If you approach your father with this idea and really feel that you want to maintain control over your own body by not having sex, then that's your choice and I respect that. If you are a father, I understand that you want to protect the one you love. But the sexist roots of this concept, and the construct of virginity itself, is what I have an issue with. I have an inherent problem with women only being valued if she doesn't have the chance or freedom to explore her sexuality or evaluate any other options beyond pure abstinence, and these rings are symbols of that concept. If women are to truly be free to make their own decisions about their own bodies, then they have to learn independence when they are young. Whether or not a young girl views virginity as being moral high ground is her prerogative, but this somewhat still stems from the concept of her being viewed as property. Empowerment can only occur if progress is made through the reconstruction of societal norms, and progress does not derive from following inherently sexist or harmful traditions. In short, women should be allowed to understand that they have control over their own body, and even if they choose to remain abstinent, whether or not they maintain their virginity does not make them any more or less of a human being. The stress should be on choice, not on pressuring girls to conform to supposed cultural expectations in accordance with the widespread fetish with sexual purity. It's her body, it's her choice; give her the right to say so.
No comments:
Post a Comment