Abstinence Pledge Survey

[chobie]

What word should we use to describe popular culture's portrayal of Paris Hilton types and their sex tapes and wanton promiscuity (the dudes too.....you know, the long list of ever-changing partners")? Is tacky ok? I think creepy applies also. Mega big time.

Somehow, I do not think this unrestrained sexuality is what we are looking for. Granted, this is a bit of an extreme comparison......yet our children are watching this swill more than we know.....and are basing their behavior on this more and more........which brings us back to,

I am ok with the purity pledge and find it much less creepy than our "prevailing culture" as viewed through the media.
"
I also fail to find anything liberating about it......maybe I am missing something.

I agree with you both extremes are creepy and no I don't find it liberating for young people to be running around having sex just for the sake of having it. I do find it liberating when a girl's body is considered hers and hers only.

However, I find it very telling you mention only female sexual behavior. I don't like the focus either way on female sexuality (either constant media attention to oversexualized females OR trying to keep girls "pure" for their husbands).

I do think that emphasis on a female's virginity is harmful to women overall. Look at the cultures that value that above all and instill the most control over female sexuality and you will see honor killings, female genital mutilation, child brides, etc.

 

[daisax]

It is culture we are speaking of after all. Christian conservatism is an important part of a culture that has flourished for over 2000 years and, in the interest of tolerance and diversity, deserves a modicum of respect......or at least an honest appraisal of why it is suddenly creepy.

Once again, there's nothing "creepy" about restricting sexual activity to marriage. Some may not see the appeal, but I don't think anybody thinks it's creepy.

What's "creepy" is getting up in public and proclaiming one's virginity in conjunction with Daddy. And the concept that Daddy is the one "in charge of protecting it" until he gives daughter away in marriage to the lucky guy who "gets it" next. Yes, creepy.

What word should we use to describe popular culture's portrayal of Paris Hilton types and their sex tapes and wanton promiscuity (the dudes too.....you know, the long list of ever-changing partners")? Is tacky ok? I think creepy applies also. Mega big time.

There's a great big world of "in between" two horrible extremes.

 

[freckles and boo]

I do think that emphasis on a female's virginity is harmful to women overall. Look at the cultures that value that above all and instill the most control over female sexuality and you will see honor killings, female genital mutilation, child brides, etc.

I agree. Not to mention rape in certain areas where men with HIV believe "sex" with a virgin will cure them.

 

[bicker]

This would be a matter of opinion in which neither side holds sway over the other......except that ...

So much for rationality. So basically you're literally saying that reasonable people can disagree, except if they disagree with you.

Yes, the individual voter should decide based on their own beliefs and values.....and it should be done at the state level at the highest.

That way, the federal government would be prevented from protecting the personal freedom of individuals who are in states that are ready to abridge such freedoms. A very neat package of tyranny you'd have crafted, if you were to get your way.

I do concede your point on removing government from the equation......yet see the opposite occurring over the next four years (at least).

And ask yourself why. It wasn't because of John McCain's long history of moderation, but rather how he was driven to the extreme right-wing.

 

[meeskamouska]

I agree. It's the archaic notion that a girl's worth depends on the intactness of her hymen.
.

Can I use this quote...it really is priceless!!! BTW----I so agree!!!

 

[smartestnumber5]

I don't think it's surprising at all that abstinence only sex-ed or taking part in purity vows/rings/balls would be correlated with a higher likelihood of having unprotected sex. If you think sex (at least premarital sex) is dirty and wrong and something you're not supposed to be doing, then it makes sense that you aren't going to prepare for it or admit to yourself that you are planning to do it. (In high school/early college amongst my female friends who were having sex, there seemed to be two kinds of "first times." Some of us--generally those of us who were totally open about sex and didn't think it was a bad thing and had no thought of "waiting" planned it ahead of time, went and got birth control, bought condoms, and were honest with the guy about what we wanted. Then there were the friends who were more shy about sex, couldn't talk about it honestly with their boyfriends. They'd one day announced "I'm afraid I might get pregnant. I had sex last night and we didn't use anything. I didn't plan it. It just happened." To which, of course, those of us who had the went and thought "How does sex 'just happen'? Did he fall in? You've been doing 'everything but' for weeks--you didn't think it might be a good idea to buy some condoms?")

So I don't think it's surprising at all that making kids feel that sex is dirty or bad or immoral, or pressuring them about abstinence, or not being upfront in giving them full info about birth control and condoms leads to more risky sex. I don't think it's at all coincidental that the U.S. has such high rates of STDs and teen pregnancy compared to many other western countries where teen sex rates are no different. (I get the sense that we are one of the only countries where people think that teen sex is a problem rather than teen *unprotected* sex.) And given this, I think the fact that our govt is actually promoting this kind of public health education is horrible (but not at all surprising ).

In terms of people's personal decisions (not what kids are taught in schools, or govt endorsed/supported programs/education), I don't really care what other people do in terms of sex. Have it, don't have it, have it with four people at once, I don't care. I do think it's odd that people pick sex as *the* thing to not do. Why not refuse to go to the movies with anyone but your future spouse? Or never eat lobster? Or any other fun activity? Personally I see nothing special about sex. But whatever--I don't care what people do about any of those things.

I do think that the vast majority of interest in virginity and "waiting" and "purity" is about controlling specifically female sexuality. All of the older (50+) women in my family were virgins when they got married. None of the men were. (Of course, it's definitely possible that someone is lying, but this is the official word.) They act as if it's totally normal and appropriate that the women were virgins and the men were not--because women are supposed to be pure and men are supposed to be horn-dogs. I totally heard the "it's a gift" thing growing up. My aunt also used to say "everytime a woman has sex with someone who's not her husband she's giving a part of herself away." (Funny, I still have all my limbs and organs, and quite a few extra pounds. What are these parts that have gone away with all the pre-marital sex I've had? I wish more would go away--wouldn't that be the best diet ever! ) It's disgusting. There may be some folks/religions who are equal opportunity about abstinence, but that has not been my experience in my family.

I also find it amazingly amusing that the whole idea of "waiting" and abstinence implies a certain UNTIL--almost always, until marriage. Why do parents (and especially why does the govt) assume that kids will want to get married? (Better yet, why do they assume their children will be of a sexual orientation such that they will be legally allowed to get married to a person they'll end up with? )

 

[meeskamouska]

Absitenence education does a disservice to our youth. I had a 16 yr old tell me that his chances of getting HIV were just as likely with a condom as without....so, why use them. He stated he learned it in sex ed!!!! This is one of the scare tactics conservative sex educators use to promote absitenence!!! These types of "facts" our children are taught are putting them at risky.

Risky behaviors are on the rise because many youth are only taught that sex is one form....the form that can get you pregnant. They are not informed of the higher risk of transmission through backdoor avenues...if you catch my drift. Due to this presumed "virginity" they are having multiple partners.





I

 

[Pigeon]

These pledges are extremely creepy and are a throwback to the woman as chattel mentality.

My daughters are more than their hymens. The status of their hymens has exactly nothing to do with their "purity." I place no particular value on anybody's virginity. I want them to be responsible about sex, and I provide all the accurate information about sex that's appropriate to their stage of development.

I'd far rather that they were sexually active at the appropriate time with people they love than that they felt pressured into marrying too young because of the simple biological urge to have sex.

 

[Eeyores Butterfly]

Maybe it will make more sense if I explain my reasoning better.

I grew up in a non religious household. My father reads the Bible but does not attend church. My mother doesn't know what to believe but has a problem with most Christian denominations and the hate they preach. They allowed me to choose my own religion. I started attending a Southern Baptist Church when I was 8 because a friend went there. It was through my youth group there and my two best friends who attend other churches that I heard about True Love Waits.

I made the decision in middle school to do it. It is my belief that God's intent was for people to wait for marriage. God asks for us to remain pure. To me this is staying away from any temptation that leads you astray from His plan. Be it sex or other sin. That is how I interpret it and I do not expect others to hold my same beliefs.

I later became Catholic after much research into the other denominations and visiting various churches. My belief still holds that this is what God has intended for my life. But it is not just a a religious pledge. Other factors went into my decision:

-I do not have to worry about STD's. When I say no sex, I mean no sex. I don't split hairs about types of sex. I have held hands with friends as they waited for the results of STD tests, this is something that I do not have to worry about. Most STD's are incurable and will lead to serious repercussions later in life. Yes, you can use a condom or other barrier protection, but they can and do fail. Albeit, rarely, but it is always a possibility.

-I have known several people who have stated they wish they waited. It seems that sex often gets used to control people or try salvage a broken relationship. It seems from my own observations that sex can complicate a relationship when it is engaged in too early. This is why I will wait.

-I grew up in a family in which physical displays of affection were not prevalent. I very rarely see my parents kiss, hug, or even hold hands. Due to work schedules and the fact my mother has sleep apnea, they don't even sleep in the same room. I grew up around two happily married people who did were not reliant on physical affection to show their love for each other, so it has simply never been a priority for me.

-I do not have to worry about an unintended pregnancy. Birth control can fail. There are also some potentially nasty side effects with birth control such as increased risk of blood clots. Most people don't get them, but the potential has always frightened me. I will not have to worry about becoming pregnant at an inopportune time and the difficult decisions inolved.


-There are many medical conditions that can affect sexual desire. What happens if one or both partners is unable to have sex for a period of time? No, most relationships are not based solely on sex, but when it is the overwhelming basis of your relationship, it can and does cause problems. I would prefer to know that a man loved me for more than just my body.

-Several you claim that wearing a ring "advertises" it and that nobody else does. How about shirts with sexual innuendo? Wearing promiscuous style clothing that puts one's body on display or dressing like a pimp as some are wont to do? What about the sacred wedding ring? In most cases the wedding is not consecrated until the couple has sex. That wedding ring advertises that you are most likely having sex with that person, and that you are in a monogamous relationship if you are inaccordance with societal norms. As I stated, most people automatically assume it is a promise ring if they notice it at all. It does not say "True Love Waits" on it or look like a typical purity ring. The ring is for me and me alone, and the only way you will know what it is is if I tell you. I don't go up to random strangers and announce it. If you met me in real life, you would most likely not know what it was.

For all I have said you can have a counterargument for, and that is fine. But this is what worked for me and the reason I chose this path.

 

[Kath2003]

Maybe it will make more sense if I explain my reasoning better.

Just thought I'd post my thoughts since I'm a similar age to you. Totally respect your choice to get this ring if you feel it's right for you; just posting a contrasting opinion. I am very much PRO sex before marriage. I wouldn't be prepared to commit to someone for the rest of my life without knowing that we were sexually compatible.

- I'm not religious, but my parents are, and the stance they took, particularly when I was younger, was that you should wait for marriage but if you DID choose to have sex before, you should do it safely.

- I don't worry in the slightest about STDs. I use appropriate protection and have been checked for STDs and had partners checked before engaging in sexual activity. I don't have sexual relationships of any kind with someone on a whim. The chance of a condom failing, when used properly, and catching an STD from it, is unbelievably remote. I'm more at risk crossing the road.

- I have known several people who have stated that they wish they had not waited. At 24 I have seen three relationships end within two years of marriage by couples who 'rushed' into it because they wanted to have that intimacy. In at least one of those cases, sexual incompatibility was a fundamental factor in the breakdown of that relationship. I don't think I can base my own experiences on those of others, though.

-I grew up in a family in which physical displays of affection were not prevalent. I very rarely see my parents kiss, hug, or even hold hands.I grew up around two happily married people who did were not reliant on physical affection to show their love for each other, so it has simply never been a priority for me. Yes, this is exactly what you wrote. I have had an identical experience.

-I do not have to worry about an unintended pregnancy. Birth control can fail, but when used appropriately is almost 100% effective, particularly when more than one type is used. I would have to use hormonal birth control due to menstrual issues anyway, even if I abstained.

-Whilst sexual desire can vary throughout a person's lifetime, the difference I see between the love I have for a close friend or a family relative, and the love I have for my partner is that I have a physical and emotional sexual attraction from them. I am as close to my best friend as my partner in every other way other than physically. To marry someone without knowing that physically we were compatible and we would have a fulfilling sex life would be terrifying - not having that intimacy and being nothing more than friends would not be a marriage to me. It would be a family-like relationship.

-I agree that sexual innuendo on shirts isn't classy.

The way I see it is that marriage is committing yourself to someone for the rest of your life. I wouldn't go to a car dealership, look at a car, sit in the car and then buy it. It could drive like an old banger and we may not be compatible at all. Heck it could be an automatic whereas I prefer a stick shift (or it could be a stick shift for someone who doesn't know how to drive one!). I'd rather take it out, test it out, have some fun and see how the car and I get along before I commit. A partner for life is a serious business, and I'm going to do everything I can to make sure that when I marry someone, we ARE a good match and we DO have a fulfilling sexual relationship. Otherwise, we're little more than best friends (and if that's what I wanted, I'd marry my best friend!).

 

[TheZue]

I think everyone has to do what works for them. Nobody knows what the future is going to hold. I bet everyone on this board will make some decision in 2009 that they will at some point wonder what the heck they were thinking. As long as people come up with the idea to wait until marriage it's fine....none of my business if you do that. But it shouldn't be anyone's business if you decide not to wait either.

And as for the pitfalls of waiting I'll never forget that my great grandmother pulled my mom aside before she got married to make sure she had given my dad the old test run...aparently she spent her entire life wishing she had and told my mom if she had she NEVER would have married my great grandfather

 

[chobie]

Maybe it will make more sense if I explain my reasoning better.

I grew up in a non religious household. My father reads the Bible but does not attend church. My mother doesn't know what to believe but has a problem with most Christian denominations and the hate they preach. They allowed me to choose my own religion. I started attending a Southern Baptist Church when I was 8 because a friend went there. It was through my youth group there and my two best friends who attend other churches that I heard about True Love Waits.

I made the decision in middle school to do it. It is my belief that God's intent was for people to wait for marriage. God asks for us to remain pure. To me this is staying away from any temptation that leads you astray from His plan. Be it sex or other sin. That is how I interpret it and I do not expect others to hold my same beliefs.

I later became Catholic after much research into the other denominations and visiting various churches. My belief still holds that this is what God has intended for my life. But it is not just a a religious pledge. Other factors went into my decision:

-I do not have to worry about STD's. When I say no sex, I mean no sex. I don't split hairs about types of sex. I have held hands with friends as they waited for the results of STD tests, this is something that I do not have to worry about. Most STD's are incurable and will lead to serious repercussions later in life. Yes, you can use a condom or other barrier protection, but they can and do fail. Albeit, rarely, but it is always a possibility.

-I have known several people who have stated they wish they waited. It seems that sex often gets used to control people or try salvage a broken relationship. It seems from my own observations that sex can complicate a relationship when it is engaged in too early. This is why I will wait.

-I grew up in a family in which physical displays of affection were not prevalent. I very rarely see my parents kiss, hug, or even hold hands. Due to work schedules and the fact my mother has sleep apnea, they don't even sleep in the same room. I grew up around two happily married people who did were not reliant on physical affection to show their love for each other, so it has simply never been a priority for me.

-I do not have to worry about an unintended pregnancy. Birth control can fail. There are also some potentially nasty side effects with birth control such as increased risk of blood clots. Most people don't get them, but the potential has always frightened me. I will not have to worry about becoming pregnant at an inopportune time and the difficult decisions inolved.


-There are many medical conditions that can affect sexual desire. What happens if one or both partners is unable to have sex for a period of time? No, most relationships are not based solely on sex, but when it is the overwhelming basis of your relationship, it can and does cause problems. I would prefer to know that a man loved me for more than just my body.

-Several you claim that wearing a ring "advertises" it and that nobody else does. How about shirts with sexual innuendo? Wearing promiscuous style clothing that puts one's body on display or dressing like a pimp as some are wont to do? What about the sacred wedding ring? In most cases the wedding is not consecrated until the couple has sex. That wedding ring advertises that you are most likely having sex with that person, and that you are in a monogamous relationship if you are inaccordance with societal norms. As I stated, most people automatically assume it is a promise ring if they notice it at all. It does not say "True Love Waits" on it or look like a typical purity ring. The ring is for me and me alone, and the only way you will know what it is is if I tell you. I don't go up to random strangers and announce it. If you met me in real life, you would most likely not know what it was.

For all I have said you can have a counterargument for, and that is fine. But this is what worked for me and the reason I chose this path.

You don't have to defend your choice. It's YOUR body, if you choose not to have sex then good for you. I do think its odd that you are ok that your future husband may not be "pure" -- if staying "pure" until marriage was that important to me, I would want a man who had the same values. And I agree that both flaunting sexuality and flaunting the lack of it, are creepy. People should keep their private life private IMO.

Your analogizing a "purity" ring to a wedding ring does not work. Wedding rings symbolize two people's commitment to each other for life and although sex is usually one aspect of that committment, its a small part in the grand scheme of things (i.e., sickness and health etc.) but all a "purity" ring symbolizes is that you (and only you) are not having sex.

 

[Oreo Cookie]

Still, I think its creepy to promise your virginity to your father until he "gives you away" to another man (your husband) to take it from you. A girl's body belongs to her --not her father or her husband.

Amen sister! I couldn't have said it better myself. If a young woman chooses to stay a virgin, the pledge should be to herself, not to her father or future husband. It's her body, the pledging to another man makes it seem like she is property of a man. A woman's body is hers, nobody elses.

 

[sarasotamom]

Why? I learned about the True Love Waits program when I was in middle school. My two best friends were part of it. I had to beg and plead with my father for the purity ring, which I found rather amusing. Of the three of us, none of us have broken our pledge (at least that I know of). One girl's older sister melted down her ring to make her husband's wedding ring.

Perhaps the difference for us is that none of our families pressured us into it and the decision was made base purely on our beliefs. None of us are naive as to the various options out there (birth control, condoms, female condoms, etc.).

For me, there was no public ceremony. I simply chose the ring with my father. It is not an official ring, just a gold band with an amethyst heart. I doubt many people notice it or even know what it is. My father didn't make a big deal over it. In fact, the reason he didn't want to do it initially is that he said he didn't want me to make a commitment I would later regret. I have had no regrets. I am currently in a relationship with a wonderful man and we have been dating for a year. He has similar views.

The ring is for me and nobody else. It is simply a symbol of the commitment I have made to myself and to God. It is not meant to encourage others to do the same or be judgmental against others. It is simply something that is special to me. I realize the choice is a very personal one, and I frankly don't give a hoot what you choose to do or not do. You will not find my father on one of those shows talking about it. Perhaps that is the difference. Those shows only show the very fringe of the group, the ones who are the most likely to make it a huge deal. You don't hear about the ones for whom it is what it was intended to be: a quiet pledge between the teen and God.

I do not find it surprising that those who took the pledge as a group and were pressured into it are more likely to break the pledge. It also does not surprise me that these kids do not know about safe sex as they are much more likely to live in families that will not talk about such things and go to private schools where the topic is forbidden. But if the desire comes from the teen themselves and they have done their homework and have a good solid rational for their belief, then it can be a good thing. No reason to be creeped out.[/QUOTE]

All true commitments are ones that we make because we want to, not those that we are pressured into doing. Congratulations!!

 

[Mr Man]

So much for rationality. So basically you're literally saying that reasonable people can disagree, except if they disagree with you.

That way, the federal government would be prevented from protecting the personal freedom of individuals who are in states that are ready to abridge such freedoms. A very neat package of tyranny you'd have crafted, if you were to get your way.

And ask yourself why. It wasn't because of John McCain's long history of moderation, but rather how he was driven to the extreme right-wing.

Actually, that is not what I am saying at all. I do not think I should have to ignore my personal life experience as a sop so we can agree to disagree. That would be dishonest.



Yes, the Federal Govt and me........we really don't agree on much. I am surprised that my comments are construed as advocating tyranny of any kind. I would simply like to vote on an issue of great moral significance. An opportunity which has been denied since the 1970's.


Yes, John McCain.....extreme right winger (lol).......if he is (and I really doubt he is-I would have received the Bat Signal from his campaign long ago), he has a very compelling cover story.....you know, (tm Caroline Kennedy all rights reserved) his long career of public service.

 

[yeartolate]

All true commitments are ones that we make because we want to, not those that we are pressured into doing.

Well there is a mouthful!!!

 

[Mr Man]

I agree with you both extremes are creepy and no I don't find it liberating for young people to be running around having sex just for the sake of having it. I do find it liberating when a girl's body is considered hers and hers only.

However, I find it very telling you mention only female sexual behavior. I don't like the focus either way on female sexuality (either constant media attention to oversexualized females OR trying to keep girls "pure" for their husbands).

I do think that emphasis on a female's virginity is harmful to women overall. Look at the cultures that value that above all and instill the most control over female sexuality and you will see honor killings, female genital mutilation, child brides, etc.

Ah, agreement. I like it.

I only have boys.......but hope to have a girl sometime in the next 3 years.....so my experience up to now is centered around my sons.

I am equally critical about males out there engaging in sex outside of marriage (or outside any other kind of monogamous relationship). Especially these professional athletes with multiple children by multiple partners.......if I was 20yrs younger.....in unbelievable physical shape (so I could run away from them quickly), and equal parts crazy and dumb, I would give them a piece of my mind too! I have zero respect for them or their ilk......in fact, professional sports have reached a tipping point for me in the last few years to where I do not take my boys to the games or make any attempt to point to them as role models. As as I am concerned, they have lost us.......and we are glad to be rid of them.

Good point about the muslim culture. But, be careful, this could be construed as ethnocentrism....well that and they could very well attempt to cut your head off for this perceived slight......bit I digress......

 

[chobie]

Ah, agreement. I like it.

I only have boys.......but hope to have a girl sometime in the next 3 years.....so my experience up to now is centered around my sons.

I am equally critical about males out there engaging in sex outside of marriage (or outside any other kind of monogamous relationship). Especially these professional athletes with multiple children by multiple partners.......if I was 20yrs younger.....in unbelievable physical shape (so I could run away from them quickly), and equal parts crazy and dumb, I would give them a piece of my mind too! I have zero respect for them or their ilk......in fact, professional sports have reached a tipping point for me in the last few years to where I do not take my boys to the games or make any attempt to point to them as role models. As as I am concerned, they have lost us.......and we are glad to be rid of them.

Good point about the muslim culture. But, be careful, this could be construed as ethnocentrism....well that and they could very well attempt to cut your head off for this perceived slight......bit I digress......

Nice try but I didn't say Muslim. There is nothing in the Koran about honor killings or female genital mutilations and in fact, those practices predate the Muslim religion. That some of the cultures that are violent and controlling of women also happen to be predominantly Muslim does not mean those atrocities I mentioned are "Muslim culture." However, it may be ethnocentric of me to point out that I do not want OUR American culture to go the way of other cultures that prize female virginity above all other female virtues, and if so, I will own being ethnocentric. I do think equality of women and laws that protect a woman's autonomy over her body is a big part of what makes our country and its culture so great.

 

[Mr Man]

Once again, there's nothing "creepy" about restricting sexual activity to marriage. Some may not see the appeal, but I don't think anybody thinks it's creepy.

What's "creepy" is getting up in public and proclaiming one's virginity in conjunction with Daddy. And the concept that Daddy is the one "in charge of protecting it" until he gives daughter away in marriage to the lucky guy who "gets it" next. Yes, creepy.



There's a great big world of "in between" two horrible extremes.

I can see your point about just kinda yelling out and confirming his daughter's virtue as it were........people are funny sometimes......I would have probably said something like "Here is my daughter, Rookie of the Year!!" ....and then my wife would smack me in the back of the head and the guests would move on to demolish the hors d'oevres........without further ado......


But, a Father is charged with protecting his children in all ways.....it is part of "The Code".....in fact, I cannot think of a Father, in good standing, who would ever loudly proclaim at a wedding how proud they were that she "took care of that whole virgin thing while she was young......she is AP-gifted".......just checked it off the list.....

/s that's just a little joke of course.....


You are right, there is quite a bit of middle ground between the two extremes though.....one has zero chance of STD......the other is a mathematical certainty for some sort of discomfort "down below" at some point.

 

[Mr Man]

Absitenence education does a disservice to our youth. I had a 16 yr old tell me that his chances of getting HIV were just as likely with a condom as without....so, why use them. He stated he learned it in sex ed!!!! This is one of the scare tactics conservative sex educators use to promote absitenence!!! These types of "facts" our children are taught are putting them at risky.

Risky behaviors are on the rise because many youth are only taught that sex is one form....the form that can get you pregnant. They are not informed of the higher risk of transmission through backdoor avenues...if you catch my drift. Due to this presumed "virginity" they are having multiple partners.





I

Interestingly, the survey cited by OP of this thread contains the following factoid......

"While there was no difference in the rate of sexually transmitted diseases in the two groups, the percentage of students who reported condom use was about 10 points lower for those who had taken the pledge."

Perhaps the title of this thread should have been,

Study: Condom Use Make No Difference in Rate of STD's (& Teenagers tell truth about sex at least sometimes)......ok that last part is mine....