http://tlc.discovery.com/tv-schedules/special.html?paid=2.1213.55996.37145.0

(Demitri Martin does a standup routine in which he says “Cotton balls is one example of something I’d buy, but wouldn’t want to have as a nickname.” As for Integrity Balls, I think the reverse is true.)

Unfortunately, the only detailed source I know of seems to have gone away, and for me google only turns up discussions linking that one source, but this Feministe post contains some excerpts.

Having been in that crazy, repressive, sex-obsessed patriarchy for 18 years, I’d say Dale and many of the posters are hitting the nail on the head. I know very few people who did grow up in it who have a healthy sex life, married or not, now. I spent my time reading this post nodding like a bobblehead doll.

Thanks Betsy. Glad to hear I’m not too far off.

Anybody else out there with first-hand experience want to chime in on accuracy? I *really* do not want to waste anyone’s time with straw men. At the same time, I do not want to pull back from a valid critique of an extremely influential attitude toward sex and sexuality that has found its way into federal policy. Here are some relevant numbers from the by the numbers page:

• Percent decline in teen pregnancy between 1990 and 2002: 36%
• Percentage of that decline due to delaying sex or having sex less often: 14%
• Percentage of that decline due to increased use of contraceptives: 86%

• Total federal funding of abstinence-only sex education programs in 2006: $176 million
• Federal programs promoting comprehensive sex ed, including contraceptive use: 0
• Average age of first sex for students in abstinence-only programs: 14.9 years
• Average age for students not in abstinence-only programs: 14.9 years

• Percentage of U.S. teens receiving abstinence-only sex education in 1995: 9%
• Percentage receiving abstinence-only sex education in 2002: 21-24%

• US sex education teachers teaching abstinence-only in 1988: 1 in 50
• US sex education teachers teaching abstinence-only in 1999: 1 in 4

• US sex ed teachers who believe students should be taught about contraception: 9 in 10
• US sex ed teachers prohibited by law from doing so: 1 in 4

(Citations here.)

Normally I love reading this blog, but I feel like people are going to extremes to get offended over what I think is a somewhat weird but generally well-intentioned phenomenon.

I’m really glad you chimed in! I agree completely that this, like most expressions of fundamentalism, is well-intentioned. I make that point in the seminars as often as possible — that it’s important to constantly remind ourselves of the good intentions of religious relatives, etc. But I also think good intentions do not excuse the very sad outcomes of this kind of thinking.

No one ever said that mothers have no role in looking out for their girls, or their boys, for that matter.

Yes, we must be careful not to overgeneralize. Fortunately most commenters (and the post itself) are talking about this ritual, which does weirdly and tellingly exclude the mothers. As such, it’s typical of the movement: evangelicals firmly place mothers in a secondary role, and I see no reason to hide one’s offense at that. Here’s a characteristic passage:

“The responsibility for bringing children up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord rests upon fathers. Although we may delegate this authority to a mother, a Christian school teacher, Sunday school teacher, etc., we cannot escape the fact that the father is fully accountable for the task.” (from “A Father’s Responsibility – Training From a United Front” by Gary Maldaner)

Not all Christian parents teach their kids that sexual thoughts are evil or from Satan (mine certainly didn’t).

Now now, be careful. A rereading of the post will show that I referred to evangelicals every single time, not “Christians.” You need to be equally careful to notice when someone isn’t using a broad brush.

I’m not sure whether the double “yeesh” was directed at fathers blessing their daughters (the horror!) or girls deciding to make a commitment about the way their own sex lives would unfold.

It was directed at what I see as the extremely creepy invocation of repetitive magical ritual in lieu of reason, including the constant equation of sex and impurity. Others are free to find that charming, but it sends a chill down my spine, and I should be free to express that. (And I’m not alone: Google “purity ball” and “creepy” in the same search and you’ll get 2,700 hits.)

As for the girls “deciding” anything, I can’t say I see any such thing going on.

I’m also not sure why a quote from a single young woman is justification for the straw man that evangelical Christians only see the world in shades of “rape by the culture” or “rescue by the men of God.”

Surely you don’t think I based that on a single quote. I work very hard to avoid constructing straw men, so I’d be grateful for your help in seeing where I’ve gone wrong there. That claim is based on many, many years of close examination of evangelicalism, and it seems to me precisely the choice rendered by the evangelical movement — black and white, Satan or Jesus, Matthew 12:30. “The Culture” is spoken of as a single vile thing, and evangelical Christianity as the single alternative.

Again, thanks so much for commenting, and let me know where I’m missing connections here. I don’t want to do that.

-Betsy

No one ever said that mothers have no role in looking out for their girls, or their boys, for that matter. Not all Christian parents teach their kids that sexual thoughts are evil or from Satan (mine certainly didn’t). I’m not sure whether the double “yeesh” was directed at fathers blessing their daughters (the horror!) or girls deciding to make a commitment about the way their own sex lives would unfold. I’m also not sure why a quote from a single young woman is justification for the straw man that evangelical Christians only see the world in shades of “rape by the culture” or “rescue by the men of God.”

While I agree that purity balls are not exactly the coolest invention of Christian subculture, I feel like Dale (and many of the posters) are seeing crazy, repressive, sex-obsessed patriarchs where there are probably (though perhaps not only) just loving dads.

I realize that none of this is to be laughed about…

Hey, no need to ever apologize for seeing the humor. I think it’s crucial to keep one eye on the silliness of it all. I learned that in my last year at the Catholic college when I felt my sense of humor hemorrhaging. I told Becca that I was terrified I was losing that. I forced myself to find it all at least a bit funny–and it saved me. I hate to get all serious about silliness, but it really can see you through a huge amount of bullshit. I’m thrilled that I made you laugh.