Thank god they remind you of your spouse’s name during the vows.
The majority of kids who make “purity” pledges to maintain their virginity until marriage break their vows, but a handful manage to cross the finish line, usually with a combination of marrying very young and having very short engagements. Amanda Robb interviewed one such young woman who managed to keep her virginity until her wedding in such a contrived fashion; it’s pretty interesting, if not something you want to read if you’ve just eaten.
As in all stories of this nature, we must first learn about the patriarch, Randy Wilson. Randy decided to become a highly patriarchal fundamentalist nut during a low point in his life.
When Randy got a job offer in construction in Colorado, the family moved there, but soon after, the job evaporated.
“He pounded the pavement eight hours a day and couldn’t get a job flipping burgers,” says Lisa, who remained at home, caring for their children. After months of looking, Randy landed a position as a salesman for a printmedia company—not exactly a financial coup.
In such difficult times, other men— and let’s face it, women, too—might have taken to drinking, crime, or promiscuity. Some would have just taken off. Randy, however, took to the Lord.
Shoring up the sense that a lot of what is driving this throwback to archaic patriarchal traditions is anxious masculinity. Randy felt emasculated by his lack of success at work, and decided that the best way to restore his ego was to have a bevy of submissive women at home. I understand his thinking here. When I feel down, I dress the cats up in little tuxedos and pretend they’re waiting on me in a fancy restaurant so I feel important. But you know, they’re cats, not people. Also, the game doesn’t last long, because being cats, they give up catering to my whims pretty quickly. Also, we all know it’s pretend. Well, and I just made that up. I don’t really do that.
What’s really great is that the whole “make girls wait until marriage” thing is passed off as some sort of nouveau respect for women movement, but if you read this story, you realize how it’s pretty much about grinding women down to interchangeable cogs. The virginity pledgee, Lauren, has two sisters and when they met a man named Brett, he decided that he would marry one of them.
She returned home that evening and asked God if Brett was the one for her. “I set aside 40 days to really pray hard and ask for direction,” she remembers. Meanwhile, Brett also decided that Lauren and her two teenage sisters were “gorgeous.” The idea of a permanent commitment entered his mind.
“I thought, Am I crazy? I’m graduating in three months and possibly moving away,” he says. “But I could see myself marrying one of those girls!” Brett, too, began to pray. The future pilot soon found himself being “guided toward Lauren.” Two months later, he arranged to meet Randy at a coffee shop. There Brett said, “I’d like to start a relationship with one of your daughters.”
Who knows how they narrowed it down to Lauren. If Lauren’s the oldest, maybe it was a Rachel-and-Leah thing. Too bad they banned polygamy! But you know how it goes, the dad has to get rid of them in birth order, because daughters start stinking up the house if you keep them past their sell-by date of 21.
Lauren spends the rest of the article gushing about her marriage, but this detail pretty much stuck with me. Call me a hopeless romantic, but there’s something off-putting about getting married because you were the first item on the Daughters For Sale shelf, and your husband didn’t want to dig around to make sure there wasn’t a slightly fresher option in the back. I’d like to think that I’m wanted for my actual self and I want someone back not because my dad approved but because I like him, too.
But wanting someone for his or herself is not really much of an option when you have to get married in an expedient fashion to make sure lust doesn’t overcome getting to that wedding date with your hymen intact.
Seven weeks into their relationship, Brett asked Randy if he could propose to Lauren. Randy said yes. Lauren and Brett become official partners on December 29, 2006, smack in the middle of a whiteout blizzard.
The father approved the “courtship” in the spring of 2006, so basically they got married as strangers. But that’s pretty much how it has to be, it would seem, because really getting to know someone before making a commitment runs the high risk of actually wanting to get to know them sexually.
If you’re wondering if crazy fundies do it different, the answer is, “Different isn’t the even the start of it.” Their wedding night is supposed to set the tone for the marriage, of course, so before they do anything like get it on, the woman has to make a big show out of giving up her stake in being a full human being.
“Wow” is also how she describes her first night with Brett after their wedding reception, when they checked in to the Broadmoor Hotel. An explicit promise of the virginity until- marriage movement is that if you wait for the big day to have intercourse, the sex will be mind-blowing. (A popular public-school sex-ed curriculum in Colorado is called “Wait Training: Learn How to Have the Best Sex—By Waiting Until Marriage!”) In their hotel room, the first thing Lauren did was get a basin and water pitcher and wash Brett’s feet.
Come again?
“My spiritual gift is serving,” she explains. “And I wanted to show Brett, ‘I’m here to love you, follow you, and serve you.’”
Oh.
After drying her new husband’s feet, the night only got better. “It was incredible,” Lauren says of losing her virginity.
See, at least people into BDSM know it’s a game and the whips and collars get put away afterwards. And they don’t involve their parents in their little sexual rituals.
But Lauren is happy with her marriage, because she figures that her husband won’t cheat on her. The formula for finding a man who won’t cheat is getting one who was open to fucking your sisters and told your dad this. Right after that is finding someone who’s never had his natural curiosity about other women satisfied, so he’s bound to have a constant longing to find out what it’s like to color outside the lines.
Hat tip Melissa for the story.
215 Responses to “Trying to get past the finish line after firing the virginity pledge gun”
Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
Of all the logical leaps by fundies and right-wingers, this one puzzles me the most. Not to mention that if Lauren thinks that saving herself was the surest way to avoid post-marital temptation, she
hasn’t met me yetis in for a big surprise.Damn it! My first attempt at blockquote was a complete fuck up.
The above referred to Amanda’s statement: “See, at least people into BDSM know it’s a game and the whips and collars get put away afterwards. And they don’t involve their parents in their little sexual rituals.”
Not always. Some want to be master or slave full time. Yet somehow the collar set doesn’t seem as creepy to me as this couple does.
The “Dear Son in-law” letter from her father is pretty freakish:
I just don’t know what to say here.
“Do you ever…wash your client’s feet?”
“It’s my specialty.”
How do you know the sex is fantastic if you don’t have anything to compare it to. Masybe compared to footwashing?
Oh good, I’m not the only one who thought of Firefly.
Lost for words…
First… hahah, Petey, nice Firefly reference.
Second… I think the saddest thing about the whole virginity pledge culture is the way it is totally obsessed with sex, without knowing anything about it… it’s like a permanent state of being 12-years old and gossiping with your friends. I once read a message board for “purity girls,” and it struck me how much they were all building up sex in their minds - as if any sex (especially first-time sex) is perfect, and easy, and always totally romantic.
The washing-the-feet thing is plenty creepy… but I think that even crepier is the idea that this girl has been pressured into thinking that her first time (which was probably very awkward, considering neither of them have any experience) was “Wow.” I mean, I hope for her sake that it was… but what are the odds?
Somehow, I have a feeling the “their” in that sentence refers to Brett and Randy, not Brett and Lauren.
I’ve already decided that if anyone I’m dating asks my father for permission to marry me, I’m saying no.
Anybody taking odds that Brett really was a virgin on their wedding night?
One of those stories where you’re just waiting for the other shoe to drop…
Well, here in SE Tennessee / north georgia, we just had a 19-yr old girl at the local Independant Baptist fundie academy go into hiding (the cops are looking for her) after somebody found the dead baby in her dorm room. Acording to the medical examiner, it suffocated in amniotic fluid a few min. after birth.
The school charter will have you kicked out for pre-marital intercourse or sexual contact of any form, and especially for obtaining an abortion or assisting anyone in obtaining such.
The school spokesman stated that although she is no longer a member of the comunity, the school continues to “pray for her and her family”.
//Gee, thanks, guys.//
Naturally, no mention is made of the father, who is most likely well on the way to a successful career as a baptist minister or family councelor.
Tennessee Temple University: cesspit of moral turpitude for placing sex before honesty and kindness as a guide to morality.
Also, I have to say the concept that your first time will be anything short of horribly awkward and dissapointing. ESPECIALLY if it’s 100% your first time doing anything sexual together, which it often is for people in these weird “courtship” cults — ideally, the couple will never have been alone in a room together. The foot washing was probably their first physical contact short a chaste wedding ceremony kiss (if they were even allowed that) and maybe shaking hands once or twice.
I can’t imagine going from my first kiss to having intercourse in a matter of hours. I would have been scarred for life.
“In their hotel room, the first thing Lauren did was get a basin and water pitcher and wash Brett’s feet.”
Well, at least she didn’t have to kiss his feet as part of the ceremony like you do in a Hindu wedding.** But, then, a Hindu wedding celebration is two days long, so at least you get a really rockin’ party out of the deal.
(** No, I’m not bashing Hindus or trying to claim that their traditions are any more silly than the ones we have. I mean, please, like having your new spouse crawl up your dress in front of all your guests to remove the garter is completely normal but kissing your new spouse’s feet is horrible and archaic?)
There were a few of these fundie - marry straight of high school - types at the high school I attended in the late 90s. The attitudes presented in this tale pretty much square with what I knew of them back then.
I was creeped out by it at 16, and I’m still creeped out at 26.
agh, didn’t finish a sentence there. that should’ve been:
Also, I have to say the concept that your first time will be anything short of horribly awkward and dissapointing is probably an even bigger lie than all that “Condoms spread STD’s, the pill causes breast cancer” bullshit.
I love the fact that there are offers for russian and chinese mail order brides in the google ads bar…
My parents were, as far as I can tell, virgins at marriage- my mom told me one day that she didn’t really care (she’s one of those people who thinks green tea is a strong beveridge) but worried because she knew my dad had grown to hate it.
Um, yeah…
A guy I knew proposed to his girlfriend in their church by first washing her feet while explaining husbandly and wifely duties, then giving her the ring. He believed that the Biblical husband serves the wife as Jesus served the church.
The only circumstance I can think of when I’d wash a man’s feet before sex is if both his arms were broken. And his feet stank. And I was really, really hurting for sex. My guess is that two out of these three applied on Lauren’s wedding night.
But Lauren is happy with her marriage, because she figures that her husband won’t cheat on her.
That’s it? That’s the ONLY REASON she’s happy with her marriage? Nothing else?
Geez. I’ve heard of green-card marriages and mail-order marriages that had more going for them than “I guess he probably won’t cheat”.
Oh my. A few friends of mine has expressed an interest in remaining a virgin before marriage, but I’m pretty sure they won’t actually make it all the way. And thank god for my mother, who’s actually encouraged me to have plenty of sex before marriage.
I just can’t imagine a wedding being some sort of early date. They just don’t know each other, and that’s a terrifying idea. I think most people know their prom dates better than these people know their spouses. The whole virginity thing wouldn’t be so bad, if it wasn’t circumvented by having such scary-short dating/engagements.
First boyfriends are hard enough… but first boyfriend = spouse????
Well, at least she didn’t have to kiss his feet as part of the ceremony like you do in a Hindu wedding.
This reminds me of a really awesome (and incredibly moving) Jewish wedding I went to a few years ago where the bride and groom decided that for each kinda-sexist-yet-grandmother-pleasing tradition in the wedding, they would both do each thing. So rather than the bride having to walk seven circles around the groom (which is supposed to symbolize her making him the center of her life), they each took a turn walking seven circles around each other; they stomped the glass together, etc.
I can’t believe this article was written in Marie Claire. Man, I remember back in the Clinton Administration, when they were all about the evils of the Taliban and FGM, covered Take Back The Night rallies, etc. I’ll never stand up for them again.
I need to learn to take advice. I ate just before reading that article and I really was nearly sick.
I can think of circumstances in which two virgins’ first act of intercourse could be pretty damned good. But those circumstances all depend on the couple having already done some thorough fooling around first, therefore knowing each bodies and what they like; and taking the time to do the deflowering part after she’s already had an orgasm by other means. And that depends on them both being fairly uninhibited, candid, and as generous to themselves as they are to each other.
None of which describes Lauren and Randy.
I can’t believe this article was written in Marie Claire.
Don’t get too freaked out, Opo — the article includes editorializing from the writer like this:
It’s more of a, “Yes, these people seem freaky, but they’re still human even if we don’t agree with them” article than a, “Yes, yes, all girls should stay virgins until marriage!” article.
My sister works with a bunch of fundies in rural Oklahoma. One day, one of her coworkers was scandalized by someone’s daughter having premarital sex and she wanted my sister to join in the pearl clutching. Of course, my sister being all contrary and practical, wouldn’t do it. She matter of factly compared premarital sex to buying a car. If you’re in the market to buy a car, you’ll test drive at least a couple before you settle on one you like and can live with, and you probably will only keep the car for 10 years or so at most. With a husband, ideally you’ll keep him for life, so it just makes sense to test drive a few of them as well, just to make sure you’re compatible.
Sounds like a sensible approach to me, but then I’m not a fundie. Apparently the woman in question was shocked the my sister would say such a thing and now keeps her distance lest she gets corrupted. Which is exactly how my sister likes it.
Right after that is finding someone who’s never had his natural curiosity about other women satisfied
Was Brett also a virgin? I find that a little hard to believe. It would certainly explain the “Wow”.
Nothing wrong with people choosing not to have sex, or to wait for marriage, if that’s what they want. Making it all about a shrink-wrap pussy seal is well into Creepyland, though. Especially if it’s supposed to be some kind of guarantee (of good sex or fidelity).
Pablo:
The text that you want to block quote should be between the beginning and end blockquote tags, not as an argument to a blockquote element, like you did.
Like (HTML entities follow, hopefully I did this right):
<blockquote>Some text</blockquote>
not
<blockquote cite=”Some text”>
like you did. I don’t think blockquote takes any arguments except CSS ones.
I can think of circumstances in which two virgins’ first act of intercourse could be pretty damned good. But those circumstances all depend on the couple having already done some thorough fooling around first, therefore knowing each bodies and what they like; and taking the time to do the deflowering part after she’s already had an orgasm by other means.
Having been in that very situation before, I speak from experience when I say, no, really, the intercourse part was still pretty bad. I mean, luckily we had other stuff to fall back on, but my first thought after our pathetic attempt at penile penetration was “Wow. That’s it? Did we do something wrong?” And I was lucky enough to have divested myself of my hymen years before. Adding physical pain to all that awkwardness would have made me never want to have intercourse ever again.
Also @ Mnemosyne — Thanks. I couldn’t face reading through the whole article after the first few paragraphs when Robb tried to paint her as this thoroughly sensible girl in a completely appropriate, even ideal, situation. I might try again after I’ve digested dinner some more.
“cite” is a correct attribute for the blockquote element, but it should only be used for the URL of the quoted text.
Technically, paragraph tags should go inside the blockquote, as you’re quoting the semantic structure of the original text as well as the content.
Erm, not to derail the thread or anything…
On the other hand, I know a couple of people in arranged marriages - as in they only met for maybe a total of ten hours, most of the chaperoned, before marrying - and they’ve turned out to be happy, stable couples. It’s a matter of having parents who really give a damn about their kids happiness and having a completely different set of expectations. In both cases the wife has expressed great satisfaction with her sex life. Both couples are Hindu, so their heathen copulation is no doubt more raunchy than the fundegelical kind.
Also, one of my ex-girlfriends is in an arranged marriage (Muslim) - I strongly suspect that she engaged in some kind of fakery on the wedding night to assure her husband (or more likely, his mother) of her virginity. It’s waaaay fucked up and weird - she’s in purdah, wearing a veil, not allowed to be in the company of a man unless she’s related to him or is accompanied by a male relative. I suspect that the reason she was so wild when I knew her was because she was all too aware of what was coming once the family decided it was time for marriage. I’d love to get in touch with her to catch up, but I fear that the consequences of being caught talking to me might be quite severe. Patriarchy sucks.
Both couples are Hindu, so their heathen copulation is no doubt more raunchy than the fundegelical kind.
I’m debating whether a simple STFU is in order, or maybe the more drawn out Shut. The. Fuck. Up.
Oh, I might. It’d be totally kinky.
I’ll also add that arranged marriage can work, when the parents and children are very well-attuned, and when it’s done with the happiness of the children (the REAL happiness of the children, not the surface “he’s a good provider” type stuff) is the priority. And even then, if for some reason there’s some aspect of the situation that wasn’t forseen, or the two people turn out not to be very compatible, it can still be hell.
That is awesome. My poor cousin couldn’t get out of the garter thing at her wedding (she finally gave into to an insane amount of pressure). She totally would have gone for something like this, though. And would have had the sense to not tell the mother-in-law about it beforehand.
Just like the stool her bridesmaid handed to her before the couple began to say their vows and a bunch of other funny stuff she thought of.
Wasn’t there a Gilmore Girls episode where Lane had the same experience, but made the stupid (and I thought un-Lane-like) assumption that she was just one of those people didn’t like sex?
I’m going to bounce out the door the first guy that comes to me for permission to date, court, or even marry my daughter. Better yet, I’ll be brandishing my rifle. Because I can’t think of more disrespectful thing a suitor could do than to circumvent Nea and come to me for directions and permissions on what she should have.
*thinks about some good (but highly improbable) Harry/Ginny fannish he’s read*
“But you know, they’re cats, not people. Also, the game doesn’t last long, because being cats, they give up catering to my whims pretty quickly. Also, we all know it’s pretend.”
Wow, I can never get them to *start* catering, nevermind how quickly they give it up. In fact, in my experience with cats, most of ouy interaction involved me catering to *their* whims.
Good points all around, but I have to say the part that creeped me out the most was:
“I was just like, Why hang out with a guy, break your heart, hang out with the next guy, break your heart again?” Lauren says, when I ask her what she was thinking the day she told her dad she wanted to be a virgin until marriage.
Something about this makes me sad, the idea that she feels so… fragile, I guess, to use her father’s word, that she can’t deal with heartbreak. I dunno. I don’t want to get all “suffering builds character!” but I do think that we grow from our mistakes, and from deep relationships even if they end. Also the fact that she avoided boys completely–how sad, to cut yourself off from half the population that in rare cases might have been a source of friendship, comfort, and joy.
So Lauren thinks her new husband won’t cheat on her?
Hmmm, when I was in Iraq, 75% of the men who hit on me were married. I knew this one man whose wife is a full time homemaker who wouldn’t get a job to save her life. He was one of those “family values” types. Thought abortion should be illegal in all circumstances. Married for 20+ years. Guess what he was doing? Trying to get laid while deployed. Jerk.
Not to mention that I think your heart would be about ten times as broken if you replaced “Hang out with” in that pasages with “Marry”. All the people I’ve been with who turned out to be assholes? Sure, that really sucked. And I hate knowing every time I get into a new relationship that chances are I’m just signing myself up for the same crap all over again.
But at least I didn’t marry any of them.
Seriously, yo. Put some blinkers on that warning or something.
I got to
and I nearly lost the ice cream cone I just ate.
Opop- I think Tog was being snarky, but I can kind of see what his point may have been. Once we switched from the patriarchy based economic model of marriage (i.e. He’s a good provider/she raised the kids well, so who’s complaining) to a patriarchy-based true wuv model combined with post war suburban isolation nuclear family model, we lost the tradition of women/men training other women/men for every last part of their clearly defined roles. Sex became secret and shameful at the exact moment it was supposed to become one of the defining characteristics of the relationship. Then the sexual revolution disrupted the roles, and the people trying to get them back are now missing a piece of the puzzle.
It is entirely possible that the average Hindu couple that just met and married as virgins is having raunchier, better sex than their Christian fundie counterparts (not that they’d have to be too raunchy to exceed that bar, mind you), if only because they didn’t have their traditional support networks eroded by a random interval of isolation+prudery. And even if they don’t, they at least don’t have to try and reconcile their clearly traditional Eastern relationship with the Western goal of transcendent, life-altering, forever and ever luv.
I may be grasping at straws here, but I know a couple of seemingly satisfied arranged-marriage couples, and I can’t picture them, even in private, feeling it necessary to justify their choice by describing the sex as “Wow.”
another day, another example of why I’m happy to be free of some freaky-ass heterosexual life scripts. I just do not get the fucking desires to control people like property. This shit is fucked up.
What happens if you ask a father for permission and he says no? Then what? “Tough shit old man!” ?
What’s screwed up about this is that in the patriarchal marriage that these two no doubt plan on having, the meaning of foot-washing for Christians has been turned entirely on its head in this act. What’s screwed up about this scene is that in Christianity, whenever there is a “ceremonial washing of feet,” it is always done by the person with the most power as an act of humility. E.g. — in the Bible, Jesus washes the feet of the apostles. Around easter, the Pope washes the feet of the cardinals. I’ve seen a liturgy in which a Bishop washed the feet of his priests. This act is much like during a Roman victory parade when a victorious general would be followed closely by a slave whispering in his ear “you are but a man, you are but a man.”To have the younger, more dependent partner in the marriage (which Lauren clearly is) to be washing the feet of her husband as an act of servitude just makes the power dynamic more warped than it already is. The analogous situation would be for the father, Randy, to wash the feet of his daughter and new son-in-law or for Brett to wash Lauren’s feet.
This isn’t making anyone more humble. Instead, it’s feeding Brett’s ego and humiliating Lauren. Once again, another clear situation in which fundies have read a passage in the Bible and then proceeded to miss the entire point.
Good point, Constantine.
Kyso, just to be clear, I was so appalled because I thought tog was making the stereotypical and racist Hindus = Kama Sutra association.
Though I think dragons also lie down the path of assuming “Eastern” people don’t have hangups X, Y, and/or Z and thus have sexier sex than we do. I don’t think any one culture, especially any culture where natural sexuality is stifled (which it certainly is in modern India), is any more sensual than any other.
“When I feel down, I dress the cats up in little tuxedos and pretend they’re waiting on me in a fancy restaurant so I feel important.”
ZOMFG!! Your cats are laffing at you! I know they are!
I feel rather sorry for Lauren, but it was notable for me to see that she displays the same kind of quiet smugness I’ve seen in a few female fundamentalist friends. Towards the end of the article, Lauren meets her new next door neighbour, a 17 year old girl who is weeping because she is pregnant to her fiance, who may be cheating on her. Lauren’s first reaction? Sympathy, condolences, shared anger at the (maybe) cheating man? Nope.
“And I thought, Oh, that’s really interesting,” says Lauren. “She’s had sex with him, and now she’s opened the door to fear and rejection. What’s she going to do if he leaves? She’s got his child, she’s only 17, she didn’t graduate high school. Now what?”
Then she goes to wax smugly about how great it is that she’s the ‘only one’ to know Brett intimately, to ‘give him everything’ and how she can now be secure in the knowledge that he won’t cheat on her or dump her. Because they have more ‘trust’ and how she’s ‘whole’ by being a virgin on her wedding night.
My sympathy is much lessened - but I still feel sorry for someone who is so naively confident about a man she barely knows. I don’t wish any misery on her but I do hope life opens her eyes a bit.
opoponax: Were you by any chance atmy Jewish-ish wedding, in Eugene, OR, a few years back? Because that would be nuts, but your description sure matches. At least, I found it sweet.
The thing that gets me in these articles, though, is that– you know, I married young. Terrifingly young, really. But the marriage has been wonderful so far, and I was a precocious kid– had sex for the first time at 14, and had ’serious boyfriends’ aplenty before leaving high school…
Its not that I can hold us up as some sort of paragon of feminist egalitarianism. I might do it differently were I do to it now (though, I think I’d end up with the same fellow, he’s awesome). What this article draws out for me is that it isn’t so much the age that is terrifying, it’s the lack of life experience– just moving from one man’s confining box to another.
I hope they all rebel when they hit 30 and deafen the world with their screams as they wake. Hell. Let’s hope they do it at 25. Imagine what that would do to the political climate.
“My sympathy is much lessened - but I still feel sorry for someone who is so naively confident about a man she barely knows. I don’t wish any misery on her but I do hope life opens her eyes a bit.”
Maybe it will, maybe it won’t. Some people realize that doing everything according to some arbitrary set of rules in the belief that they’ll protect you from other people’s bad acts is bullshit, others react to the revelation by freaking out at the thought of not being able to keep themselves safe from things that are beyond their control and clinging to those arbitrary rules even more fiercely.
Adding even more to the sense that they’re emotionally 12 is the fact that Lauren decided that young to take a virginity pledge, and then stuck to it. Sure, when I was 12 I thought I’d wait for marriage too, but you know what happened? I grew up!
Of course, a good bit of that growing up was meeting people my own age who had already chosen differently, an opportunity one knows was not available to our poor protagonist.
And you left out the bit of quote where Brett says he thinks he mentioned Lauren specifically. Dude, if you can’t even remember and it’s been less than a year…
I completely agree with this. However, I’d say that assuming that anyone, “Eastern” or otherwise, might have sexier sex than a bunch of repressed, hung-up, sex-obsessed-and-simultaenously-ashamed, body-self-conscious, no-touching, steeped-in-a-sense-of-wrongness fundies is a pretty safe bet.
However, I’d say that assuming that anyone, “Eastern” or otherwise, might have sexier sex than a bunch of repressed, hung-up, sex-obsessed-and-simultaenously-ashamed, body-self-conscious, no-touching, steeped-in-a-sense-of-wrongness fundies is a pretty safe bet.
Haven’t you ever heard about Catholic girls being wild in bed because of all the repression?
Sadly, it doesn’t work that way for all of us — sometimes the repression takes — but some people are essentially able to use it as a kink. I could see a fundie being able to let go because, after all, this is her real-and-true-ordained-by-God husband.
It doesn’t surprise me that she’s so afraid of being hurt; if your family is a patriarchy, and you’re a girl, you already have absorbed the message that you don’t matter. A situation not likely to make you trust males.
As for her dad, well, he’s the devil she knows. All his talk about keeping her safe is just code for “locked up,” and the church and sacrifice talk is a way of manipulating her so that she doesn’t even question it. He may be very sincere, in that he sees her as a fragile object instead of a full person, but that doesn’t make him any better of a parent.
This is why I get pissed when men of my age/acquaintance say, “but if I had a daughter, I’d shoot any boy that comes near her, because I know what they’re thinking!” Because all teen boys are secretly rapists and teen girls are incapable of making choices.
“It was incredible,” Lauren says of losing her virginity.
Hear that, virgins? SEX. IS. INCREDIBLE.
Don’t do it.
Here’s what I found odd and creepy a bout the whole damn thing:
Another man’s wife? Wait, I thought she wasn’t a wife until she got married, who the fuck was she married to before? Oh wait, daddy, I’d forgotten. I’ll be in the shower…
*delurks*
Hugo posted my story regarding purity pledges over at his place — I have been with my boyfriend for over five years. After years of being stauch Focus on the Family supporters True Love Waits ring wearers, we decided to loose our virginity after four years of dating. I sometimes wish I hadn’t posted about our choice to become sexually active, because in the blogsphere, you’re damned if you do and you’re damned if you don’t. A year and a half ago, I commented on how I wanted to wait until marriage and was deemed prude and “holier than thou.” Less than a year later, I posted about being sexually active and was deemed “not old enough to make adult decisions.” I don’t know what I should say to get people to understand my position(s), because nothing seems to work.
I guess my point is this: I agree with your assertions — I actually emailed FotF and they were. not. nice. I don’t regret my loosing my virginity when I did. But I don’t pity the girls who wait until marriage. I do not doubt many of them are happily married, but of course, waiting until marriage is no indicator that you will be gleefully married. The simple fact the one you made: unless you get married early on in your courtship (and life — say, at 21), then you CAN do it. But the longer you wait, the harder it is. It’s simple logic. I agree with you there.
Great post.
*delurks*
Hugo posted my story regarding purity pledges over at his place — I have been with my boyfriend for over five years. After years of being stauch Focus on the Family supporters True Love Waits ring wearers, we decided to loose our virginity after four years of dating. I sometimes wish I hadn’t posted about our choice to become sexually active, because in the blogsphere, you’re damned if you do and you’re damned if you don’t. A year and a half ago, I commented on how I wanted to wait until marriage and was deemed prude and “holier than thou.” Less than a year later, I posted about being sexually active and was deemed “not old enough to make adult decisions.” I don’t know what I should say to get people to understand my position(s), because nothing seems to work.
I guess my point is this: I agree with your assertions — I actually emailed FotF and they were. not. nice. I don’t regret my loosing my virginity when I did. But I don’t pity the girls who wait until marriage. I do not doubt many of them are happily married, but of course, waiting until marriage is no indicator that you will be gleefully married. The simple fact the one you made: unless you get married early on in your courtship (and life — say, at 21), then you CAN do it. But the longer you wait, the harder it is. It’s simple logic. I agree with you there.
Great post.
What gets me about all this is that Lauren didn’t go to college. No education beyond whatever homeschooling her mother provided. So if things don’t work out with Brett… well, they’d better, because she hasn’t a clue.
Of course, I suppose, she could always go back to Daddy?
One would hope.
A former planned parenthood nurse I worked with was Lauren in her earlier life, almost to a tee. After her 3rd kid, her husband up and vanished, refused to send money, and her entire family blamed her for not being a good enough wife. Her mother basically told her that she stopped caring for herself (i.e. gained too much weight) and wasn’t accomplishing her wifely duties, so her husband was right to up and leave her. They ignored the fact that she had twins that had a lot of health problems, so she was caring for them around the clock. She went to live with her sister, who was done with all the fundamentalist BS, and they helped each other get through nursing school, although it took almost 10 years. Nothing enrages her more than these types of scenarios. Her cousin also believed her husband would never cheat on her just like Laura- but he did. He came back, infected her and daughter was born HIV positive, then accused her of cheating on him and up and left her. Unfortunately, her cousin, her cousin’s ex and the girl all passed away from AIDS (this was back in the early 90’s), leaving a son all alone.
I’ve heard so many horror stories from ppl that’s left quivers and fundie movements like this. It’s terrifying.
It would be interesting if Marie Claire could go back in ten years and interview this woman again, but chances are she’d absolutely refuse to admit to any problems whatsoever (”No! My marriage is fantastic! Really!”).
I have more respect for couples practicing BSDM. At least they have safe words and don’t pretend they’re carrying out their activities because some god told them to. And they certainly don’t go around trying to claim that their lifestyle is something everyone should do on pain of everlasting sin.
“But I could see myself marrying one of those girls!”
Okay. First: Ew.
Second: You who this reminds me of? Mr. Collins in “Pride and Prejudice.”
“Having now a good house and a very sufficient income, he intended to marry; and in seeking a reconciliation with the Longbourn family he had a wife in view, as he meant to choose one of the daughters, if he found them as handsome and amiable as they were represented by common report. (snip) Mr. Collins has only to change from Jane to Elizabeth — and it was soon done — done while Mrs. Bennet was stirring the fire.”
Mr. Collins. One of the great romantic heroes in literature? Not so much.
And you know what else this reminds me of? “The Rules.” Lauren has that same sense of “if I follow this set of rules 100% perfectly, I’ll have a 100% guarantee of marital happiness.” Kind of sad, really.
As to the “Wow”: I mean, what else is she going to say? “After all that, it was kind of a letdown”? She has to convince herself that it was the most amazing thing ever. Otherwise, the whole house of cards comes crashing down.
Sheesh.
Constantine. The Roman ritual was actually more intense than that. It was a slave, whispering in the ear of the guy being given the Triumph, “sic transit gloria mundi”, All glory turns to dust. Which has the connotation, of, “Enjoy it while you can, because heroes fall, and even if you stay on top, you’re going to die”
The church I sometimes go to has the rector wash the feet of the congregation on Maundy Thursday.
He’d be scandalised if they tried to do it for him.
Then you haggle for a bit, and if you can’t come to an agreement on one of the daughters, find another supplier.
Seriously, if I were the father, I’d be warning all my daughters to steer well clear of a would-be suitor who thought they were almost interchangeable.
Male virgins do exist — I wouldn’t say that he was definitely a virgin at his wedding but I also wouldn’t discount him from actually holding off. Now, five years from now, once his madonna/whore complex has kicked in, I’m sure he’ll be all over town because he’s taken a liking to stuff his wife shouldn’t do. But that’s another story. Afterall, he’s already shown a predeliction to a little kink: looks like he’s at least a foot fetishist (they’re very sly, by the way… but you can score some killer foot massages from them).
“In such difficult times, other men— and let’s face it, women, too—might have taken to drinking, crime, or promiscuity. Some would have just taken off. Randy, however, took to the Lord.”
In other words, once again religion scored by getting to this guy when he was in a state of weakness. What is the difference between this and the cults that pick off confused kids at the airport?
Now I’ve had mind-blowing sex any number of times and with any number of women. (Well, not any number. Hey, I’m not Wilt Chamberlain, ya know? But at least three or four of them blew my mind. And we’re talking about first times. The first time I hit a home run in a softball game I was ecstatic. Not to be rude or anything, but if Brett is as inexperienced as Lisa, I’ll bet I can top him in the mind-blowing sex department. You learn a lot of technique in 30+ years of practicing any hobby. Do these people really think the first time someone makes a cabinet they make it as well as a woodworker who’s made hundreds of cabinets? The first time I did sheetrocking I did an okay job, but I was much better after I had done more sheetrock.
I know I shouldn’t say stuff like that. We’re talking about religious crazies here. Common sense doesn’t enter into it. They’ve deluded themselves into believing that a magic being walked on water and raised the dead and so on thousands of years ago and that the magic being is going to come back and do magic tricks again if you just wait long enough, so common sense stuff like “practice makes perfect” and “experience makes you better at something” don’t apply.
From the article: “…Brett also decided that Lauren and her two teenage sisters were “gorgeous.” …he arranged to meet Randy at a coffee shop. There Brett said, “I’d like to start a relationship with one of your daughters.” He thinks he specified Lauren.”
Yeah, he wouldn’t possibly cheat. Wouldn’t even think of if. Military men are different, especially if they are strong Christians. And as long as the footbaths lead to some serious shrimping, she’s got it good.
From the article: “…Brett also decided that Lauren and her two teenage sisters were “gorgeous.” …he arranged to meet Randy at a coffee shop. There Brett said, “I’d like to start a relationship with one of your daughters.” He thinks he specified Lauren.”
Yeah, he wouldn’t possibly cheat. Wouldn’t even think of if. Military men are different, especially if they are strong Christians. And as long as the footbaths lead to some serious shrimping, she’s got it good.
As long as we’re doing literary references, did anyone else think of Kreature when Lauren starting washing her master’s feet?
No education beyond whatever homeschooling her mother provided.
I think the absolute scariest part of all of this is that this girl quite possibly doesn’t even have a GED. She’s not just fucked because she hasn’t gone to college (plenty of people don’t go to college and survive it), but that on top of that she was homeschooled. Which means she has an equivalency, at best. I have a degree of respect for homeschooling, but without college to put a veneer of institutional legitimacy on your education, you’re basically looking at a life of flipping burgers, if you’re lucky.
At least the ditched and pregnant 17 year old can move back in with her parents and go back to high school, probably graduate somewhat on time depending on what kind of high school and when she left. And she won’t have to go through any kind of messy divorce. When you’re 23, married, and in the same situation, you’re way more screwed.
Kyso, just to be clear, I was so appalled because I thought tog was making the stereotypical and racist Hindus = Kama Sutra association.
That crossed my mind, but I put the Kama Sutra in the “evidence that actual sex has a proper place somewhere in the Hindu belief system” pile. I’m not attributing them with magic eastern sexual qualities, because at some point in our past we had what I suspect the traditionalists in India still have - a system of women who had an idea of how to properly prepare an ignorant girl for what her role really was, as opposed to what we have now, where someone, somewhere, clearly lied to Laura. What she expects and what she’s gonna get are not even in the same solar system.
It’s very clear that Laura expects a lot of emotional fulfillment out of this rather distorted relationship, whereas you’ll rarely see someone in an arranged marriage, even when they’re happy, blithering on about some false idea of love and security in that naive fashion. They seem to have a more realistic view of what’s going down.
I put the Kama Sutra in the “evidence that actual sex has a proper place somewhere in the Hindu belief system” pile. I’m not attributing them with magic eastern sexual qualities, because at some point in our past we had what I suspect the traditionalists in India still have - a system of women who had an idea of how to properly prepare an ignorant girl for what her role really was
Your ideas about what sexuality is like in Indian culture are incredibly misinformed. Modern Indian ideas about sex have a lot more to do with Queen Victoria than the Kama Sutra. As far as I can tell (from Desi friends and lovers, I’m not South Asian), it’s pretty much exactly the same as the prudish Christian fundamentalist landscape. The only difference might be that there’s less overt sex in the Indian media, which sends fewer mixed signals.
Since everyone else has already made all the serious comments, I just want to add that, Amanda, I really wish you dressed your cats in tuxedos and pretended they were in a fancy restaurant and such. It’s pretty much the best image ever. How cruel of you to tease us with this peek into your life and then disabuse us of it just a few short sentences later!
Actually I think her foot washing and submission comes from Luke 36-50
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%207:36-50
36Now one of the Pharisees invited Jesus to have dinner with him, so he went to the Pharisee’s house and reclined at the table. 37When a woman who had lived a sinful life in that town learned that Jesus was eating at the Pharisee’s house, she brought an alabaster jar of perfume, 38and as she stood behind him at his feet weeping, she began to wet his feet with her tears. Then she wiped them with her hair, kissed them and poured perfume on them.
39When the Pharisee who had invited him saw this, he said to himself, “If this man were a prophet, he would know who is touching him and what kind of woman she is—that she is a sinner.”
40Jesus answered him, “Simon, I have something to tell you.”
“Tell me, teacher,” he said.
41″Two men owed money to a certain moneylender. One owed him five hundred denarii,[a] and the other fifty. 42Neither of them had the money to pay him back, so he canceled the debts of both. Now which of them will love him more?”
43Simon replied, “I suppose the one who had the bigger debt canceled.”
“You have judged correctly,” Jesus said.
44Then he turned toward the woman and said to Simon, “Do you see this woman? I came into your house. You did not give me any water for my feet, but she wet my feet with her tears and wiped them with her hair. 45You did not give me a kiss, but this woman, from the time I entered, has not stopped kissing my feet. 46You did not put oil on my head, but she has poured perfume on my feet. 47Therefore, I tell you, her many sins have been forgiven—for she loved much. But he who has been forgiven little loves little.”
48Then Jesus said to her, “Your sins are forgiven.”
49The other guests began to say among themselves, “Who is this who even forgives sins?”
50Jesus said to the woman, “Your faith has saved you; go in peace.”
So it appears in her mind her husband was a stand in Jesus and this was a submissive act of love and forgiveness. Yuck. That the woman’s sins in the passage are I beleive generally thought to be sexual somehow makes it, hmm not sure if ironic is the right word, perhaps just wrong.
Now a good foot massage is a wonderfully sensual experience, and I imagine hot water and soap could add to that. Doing it as an act that brings pleasure to your partner, great. Doing it as an act of submission and possibly forgiveness at the outset of marriage, really unhealthy.
Who else is wondering about Brett’s age?
Also, I get why she’s washing his feet… it’s a total throw back to jesus days.. it was common practise.. *shudder* Remember Marry Magdalen always washing jesus’s feet?
The act doesn’t bother me so much… it’s what she thinks it means that bothers me… or what is symbolizes to him. *second shudder*
There are just so many creepy moments in this article, that it is hard to pick just one. That and I had a very difficult time reading the whole thing and would find myself skimming. But the thing that both creeps me out and saddens me at the same time, is the fact that her first kiss was at 22, at her wedding, in front of a room full of people.
It’s sad bc I think of all the great, sloppy, kissing-fumbling stuff that I had experienced before that age. And creepy bc it was like she was on display - a ritual deflowing in front of the entire village -ugh!
I just picture her sitting in full make-up/dress - fingernail polish matching her lipstick, at her kitchen table, in a sterile-clean house (with no books of course), staring vacantly into space waiting for her husband to come home from work so she can serve him.
@ The Frog Queen — I think he’s mentioned in the article as being 23. So only a year or so older than Lauren.
However, let’s all remember that Lauren has the social/emotional age of a preteen, and that Brett is a college grad.
A year and a half ago, I commented on how I wanted to wait until marriage and was deemed prude and “holier than thou.” Less than a year later, I posted about being sexually active and was deemed “not old enough to make adult decisions.” I don’t know what I should say to get people to understand my position(s), because nothing seems to work.
mermade, as one of the people who commented on your posts, either you are deliberately misrepresenting what people said to you, or you were so hurt by any criticism that you completely misunderstood it.
Reading this reminds me of Ann, Michael Cera’s girlfriend in Arrested Development. I don’t want to belittle these folk’s real-world experience, but it’s just bizarre to me that the show encapsulated it so well: “That first time after waiting and waiting, it’s going to be so awesome! Because it’s not just going to be my love and George Michael’s, but God’s love as well. God, it’s going to be incredible!”
I also recognize the ’smug superiority’ attitude. I used to hang around with highly orthodox Catholics in my younger, religious days. Despite the teaching of the Church, there’s never a lot of compassion in a fundamentalist or orthodox group. They have tons of compassion for people who haven’t been ‘exposed to Christ,’ but practically none for people who ’should know better.’
@ ink: nah, this was a wedding in upstate new york. though there were a lot of pdxers in the crowd, if i remember correctly.
But the thing that both creeps me out and saddens me at the same time, is the fact that her first kiss was at 22…
This saddens me a little, too. My first kiss, which was when I was 14, was so much a symbol of autonomy for me, secrecy, rebellion, the ability to have my own private life. The idea of it happening as part of a wedding ceremony, one of our culture’s most pervasive symbols of tradition, social conformity, and acquiescence (especially for a woman) is really awful. And I think it helps to cement the idea that she’s not her own person, and she’ll never be considered worthy of autonomy or a private life. If your first kiss is Teh Wedding Kiss (which as a tradition is a vestige of community fascination with the consummation of the marriage), that sends a lot of really coercive signals.
Also, this typifies my experience of fundamentalist/orthodox views on women’s spirituality:
I have one friend who waited until marriage (at 29) to have sex. But she certainly fooled around with guys, just no actual penetrative sex. Somehow, it just worked for her.
I have another lady that I work with who is waiting and she is about 30. I think I would have lost my mind by that point, but what the hell.
My best friend managed to wait until she was about 22 and she finally cracked - with the guy she ended up marrying. They lived together for a number of years before getting married and both her parents and mine were scandalized. Of course, I’d been having sex since I was 15 or 16 so the whole thing was completely foreign to me…
I’d never marry a guy who asked my father permission. I know so many girls who think “ooooh, romantical!!” (I used to be one of them), but it’s an archaic practice that completely diregards the agency of the woman. Two men making a deal about my future? I’m not my daddy’s property. And I’ll never be my husband’s property. Neither is Lauren. Too bad she’s too brainwashed to have realized that.
I do not doubt many of them are happily married, but of course, waiting until marriage is no indicator that you will be gleefully married.
Unfortunately, government-funded abstinence-only education is telling them just that in a lot of curricula. I hope not everyone’s buying it, but still.
Off-topic, but I’m getting married soon, and anyone who even suggests that I go through with that lame-ass fumbling-up-the-dress garter removal thing is going to get a poke in the eye for their troubles.
Opoponax - it was indeed snark - I thought the use of the word ‘copulation’ was enough of a hint.
Regarding the Erotic Easterner myth, my experience suggests that the hangups are very much in the Victorian vein, though perhaps slightly less firmly embedded. There does seem to be a bit less hostility to the idea that women derive pleasure from sex and might actually want it and initiate it, but that might just be a biased sample. Generalizing about South Asian cultures is dumb, since they vary from animist tribal cultures to westernized christians of various stripes. My limited sample is mostly drawn from westernized, educated Hindus, with a couple of Goan Catholics thrown in for good measure.
I justgot back from the bathroom I vomitted after reading this story.
Boy a meat market in your own home with Daddy acting as pimp or seller at a slave market. Did Brett get to get the girls teeth before he chose one of them?
Lauren has been trained well. She should just stop calling Brett husband and call him “Master.”
Wonder what will happen if Brett cheats. . . he may blame the Jezebel who enticed him and the Lauren and Randy hour will be fine. . . . .yeah right.
I beg to differ with you though Amanda those who really make BDSM a lifestyle. It is no longer a game for them. The master, slave dynamic is what they live every hour of their life.
This was pretty much my fist experience with my girlfriend. We spent an entire summer practicing, fooling around, exploring, experimenting, learning what worked best for her, and even then, when we finally “did it”, it was mostly us just looking at each other in awe that we were really “doing it”. It was “wow”, but mainly in the sense that it was amazing to be connected and communing with someone you love in such a way. I think we were both too surprised with the whole experience to even think about having an orgasm at that point, and just rolled around looking into each other’s eyes and, well, feeling what it felt like, on some sort of meta-level, to be that close to another person. It was “mind blowing”, but in a “consciousness raising” way, not in a “I think I nearly lost consciousness after that fourth orgasm” kind of way. That comes later (so to speak), and I’m willing to bet this girl had never even fooled around with herself, so how in the world could she know what to expect, or ask for, or tell someone else what to do for her? So, yeah, I doubt her “wow”.
Hindu’s may have secual hang-ups but for years the tradition was to give the kama sutra as a wedding present to the bride and groom …. think the fundies do that?
Hell masterbating even before marriage in the christian fundie life is considered infidelity.
Muslims are allowed to masterbate before and during marriage, “least their urges drive them into sin.”
However the Hindu tradition of giving the Kama Sutra has been diminishing in recent years. If the couple get “the book” at all it may just be blank.
I plan on giving my kids a bunch of books when they get married, a couple will be all the positions they should try
Brett and Randy get after it on the sly and we all realized this already but I only just now realized I realized it.
I state it for a fact.
I got married really young too. I met him at 20 and we were married just before I turned 22. We’re still together and still happy (9 years next week), and I think it helped that we didn’t have kids right away, but if I had to do it over, I probably would do it differently. I would still be with him, but I would have lived on my own and done some stuff before settling down.
My fundie sister in law waited and she was 30 when she got married. I don’t know how much fooling around she did before, but I’m willing to bet that it wasn’t much. The reason I suspect she didn’t do much was that about a month before her wedding, she had a gyn. appointment (her first–she’d never been before–at 30!!) and she was asking me all kinds of questions about the exam, birth control, condoms, and the general mechanics of what goes on. She knew what went where, but that was about it. I was 21 at the time and I was amazed that (1) she was a 30 year old virgin, because that was just completely out of my realm of experience, and (2) that she felt comfortable enough with me to ask that sort of stuff (aside from my being so much younger and sleeping with her brother, we’d only met 2-3 times at that point).
They are still together (will be 10 years in March) and seem really happy, but I don’t get that mindset at all. The really sad thing is that they are raising their kids like that as well. And their poor daughter won’t know what hit her when she gets out into the world (I don’t worry about their son, because he’s a boy and gets more freedom).
Hindu’s may have secual hang-ups but for years the tradition was to give the kama sutra as a wedding present to the bride and groom …. think the fundies do that?
If this was “the tradition” for “years”, it hasn’t been in a very, very long time. And probably wouldn’t have been “the tradition” for “years” among much of the population, as until recently only the very highest castes had access to literacy. It’s also doubtful that the Kama Sutra was ever a gift to the woman, or that it was seriously thought to be shared by the couple. It would be a gift for the man — and since India is a patriarchal society just like the West, I doubt this would have made much difference in the sex lives of married women.
Not to mention that “sometimes we have sex outside the missionary position” does not necessarily mean that the couple has a particularly healthy or liberal sexual relationship. I guess you’re right that it’s a tad more than the Xtianists have, but not by a whole lot.
Hell masterbating even before marriage in the christian fundie life is considered infidelity.
I seriously doubt Hindu women, married or single, are ever encouraged to masturbate. My Hindu girlfriends back in high school were scandalized by the notion that I’d looked at my own vulva with a mirror.
Muslims are allowed to masterbate before and during marriage, “least their urges drive them into sin.”
This has what to do with Hindus? They are EXTREMELY different religions with basically nothing in common. Also, even within Islam, I seriously doubt this would be directed towards women, ever.
Oh my god, this is disgusting.
Hey opp you cited the reason … da queen . . . I had just forgotten the reason for it disappearing
The article I was reporting from was talking about how many cultures gave these sexual books as wedding gifts. I’ll have to find the article.
I was just citing some sexual facts about three relgions, that’s all.
And yes the masterbation thing does apply to women too, since the Quran does state that husbands have a responsibilty to sexually satisfy their wives.
Though my Muslim friend of mine did state that her mother-in-law was scandlized when she “accidentally” walked into her bedroom and found my friend on top of her husband.
I guess there was a whole night of arguing how in the mil’s opinion the husband had let his wife emasculate him simply by her being on top.
This wraps it up for me. Thank you Mythago, this made my day.
I have one friend who waited until marriage (at 29) to have sex. But she certainly fooled around with guys, just no actual penetrative sex. Somehow, it just worked for her.
Our health teacher showed us once an article in Self or Marie Claire or something like that about four women who were doing just that, including one who gave the best rationale I have ever heard for waiting, which was something like “I have more orgasms than my friends who do have [PIV] sex, so why put myself in a position of worrying about pregnancy before I’m ready when I’m already being satisfied?”
But of course, this made sense to me because she was, in fact, concerned with her own satisfaction.
(our health class by the way wasn’t abstinence only–for sex OR drugs & alcohol–one of our teacher’s favorite points was that, should we feel the need to experimen with alcohol, which we probably would, we should always have a designated driver. in fact i would say in our pariticular climate there was probably more pressure to have sex than not to have sex)
And yes the masterbation thing does apply to women too, since the Quran does state that husbands have a responsibilty to sexually satisfy their wives.
How does this follow?
Just because the Quran states that men have a responsibility to please their wives doesn’t mean that women have a responsibility to please themselves.
This is only peripheral, but every time I mention that Christians seem to place a lot of stock in magical voices in their heads, I’m told that I’m being rude and mean and that No True Christian listens to voices in their heads. I’m just going to savor that quote there for a few minutes.
Wonder if Jesus’ll tell him he needs to go get himself a few spare wives for later, too.
I may be out of line, but who cares what these silly texts do or don’t say about sexuality. These “sacred texts” are themselves large parts of the problem in the first place. Why grant them even more importance than they deserve?
I’m not granting them any importance at all. I’m just trying to do my part as someone who has actually met, befriended, had relationships, etc. with South Asians to explain that there’s really no such thing as the idea that they have healthier attitudes about sex than westerners. You can’t make such generalizations. And that’s not even an apt generalization to make, if one were going to do such a thing.
“This is only peripheral, but every time I mention that Christians seem to place a lot of stock in magical voices in their heads, I’m told that I’m being rude and mean and that No True Christian listens to voices in their heads.”
Well, you are. Everybody knows that Christians listen to the magical dowsing rod in their pants.
I’m certain there is a lot of fooling around and exploration of sexuality that gets done in the name of “technical virginity.” I’ve had a few partners who were kinky as hell while insisting on maintaining their virginal status. Somehow oral sex and topping a guy with a strap-on wasn’t “real sex.”
Of course that means I wasn’t having “real sex” with my male partner’s either.
I don’t know. I’ll go ahaed and say it’s wrong. Why is that what they want? I can’t think of any reasons, other than religious ones, to wait until you are married to have sex. Waiting until you’ve found someone who you’re comfortable with, are attracted to, and trust, I can see, but it doesn’t follow that you have to marry that person (or be married to them).
If anything, we should expect teenagers to have sex, or at least have the urge to, and be encouraged to do so with the requisite knowledge, and on their own terms. I may be mistaken, but I’ve heard that’s kind of how it goes over in the Netherlands, and their rates of teen pregnancy and STDs are incredibly low.
Articles like this just make me wish we could start some sort of heathen rescue squad and safe home to get people like this out of these situations.
am i the only one who judges lauren as much as i judge her father and husband? anyone who willfully stays the exact same person at age 23 as they were at 13 is not someone i feel pity for.
i *loved* the author’s story of how she lost her virginity. also? i had an orgasm when i lost mine. in fact, my first time was awesome and wonderfu and earthquakes moved. probably because i had extremely low expectations. also -
http://nymag.com/nymetro/news/features/n_8480/
the author of this article is the niece of bernard slepian.
back to work.
Yeah when I was at college we always joked about the christian union people getting married very young. But they DID. Funny how since God hates sex so very much he would have made it so much fun.
But then why did God tell Adam and Eve not to eat the sacred apple - if he had said leave the sacred brussel sprouts alone we might all be in the garden now…
And religious people will tell you their religion GIVES them morality…!
I don’t know. I’ll go ahaed and say it’s wrong. Why is that what they want? I can’t think of any reasons, other than religious ones, to wait until you are married to have sex. Waiting until you’ve found someone who you’re comfortable with, are attracted to, and trust, I can see, but it doesn’t follow that you have to marry that person (or be married to them).
If anything, we should expect teenagers to have sex, or at least have the urge to, and be encouraged to do so with the requisite knowledge, and on their own terms. I may be mistaken, but I’ve heard that’s kind of how it goes over in the Netherlands, and their rates of teen pregnancy and STDs are incredibly low.
Articles like this just make me wish we could start some sort of heathen rescue squad and safe home to get people like this out of these situations.
Also, this post gives me a chance to link to may favorite t-shirt ever: Abstinence Is For Virgins
From the website:
Amanda, shoulda stayed with the tuxedo story, we wouldn’t have thought less of you. Au contraire.
I already read the story once and don’t want to jump back into that sewer, but: was there anyplace where it specifically states that Pilot-boy was also a virgin? Good lookin’ guy, with “admirable muscles”…. what are the odds?
And a PILOT? Mythologically at least, not known for their celibate ways.
About six months ago, I left my parents’ family cellphone plan to get on a plan with my boyfriend. He got a discount through work, so it made it a lot cheaper for both of us to have a plan together. And since I no longer live at home, I wanted to stop having my parents pay my cellphone bill.
The family plan was in my father’s name; the new plan was in my boyfriend’s name. That meant that my father and my boyfriend had to negotiate with the cell phone company on my behalf, to transfer my number from one plan to another.
It was the most creepily patriarchal thing ever. I don’t blame either of them, because it was a trick of how the cellphone plans were set up, but it seriously skeeved me out to have my boyfriend call my father to set up any aspect of my life. I almost wanted to just call and set up my own plan, but the lure of saving money was too strong.
It was at that point when I realized that it would skeeve me out ten times more if my boyfriend were ever to ask my father for permission to propose marriage to me. Just, no. Luckily neither boyfriend nor father would want that. I can imagine my father now: “Did you ask her? It’s what she thinks that matters. I like you fine, but I’m not the one marrying you.” And boyfriend thinks the idea is creepy too.
Even one of my very religious friends agreed with her boyfriend to get married first, then they went and asked the blessings of both sets of parents. That’s so much less creepy.
Greta Christina, I had exactly the same thought about Mr. Collins.
I don’t get the whole tradition of a guy asking your dad first before asking you for marriage thing, either. How is it “romantic”? I think most people don’t think about the why, they just think it is because you know, everyone says it’s romantic. Like flowers are romantic and no one asks why. (Fertility symbols + pretty is my guess.) The best I can figure that modern women get out of it is the assurance that they’re husband-to-be is a grown-up enough to be nice to their parents. Which is a scandalously low expectation, I suppose.
I think it’s supposed to be “romantic” because it’s “old-fashioned”.
Some old-fashioned things really are romantic. tuxedos. kid gloves. sonnets. arcane Victorian floral symbolism. pirates. jazz. The romantic movements in art, literature, etc.
Other old-fashioned things are not romantic at all. slavery. pogroms. Viking raids. trading women like property from father to son.
Just because something is “old-fashioned” doesn’t mean it’s a good thing.
mothworm: New England puritans didn’t wait. Seriously, either they didn’t wait, or there was an epidemic of premature firstborn infants in colonial New England.
Okay, leaving aside the insanely creepy “woman as possession between two men” theme here, which others have so wonderfully covered here (though, have to say, fits in with the fundie anti-choice wackjobs’ approach to abortion, because you’ll notice that the woman gets no say in her own romantic/sexual existance here. Can’t have women making their own choices or anything), I just have to point out something:
SEVEN WEEKS????!!! WTF???!!!
That’s just over a month and a half! 49 fucking days!!! And that’s right from the start of actually knowing something too, that’s not like from the period you liked the person enough to be dating them; that’s from the moment of actually MEETING THEM!!
Seven weeks from whoa to go? And they say us queers are destroying the institution of marriage.
Honestly, I can’t help but think that the two of them (although, probably Brett, as Lauren doesn’t get a say in the whole sex thing apparently
Yeah, I’ve read that. I wonder, though, if that was considered a normal part of the culture, of it was one of those unspoken things.
mothworm: New England puritans didn’t wait. Seriously, either they didn’t wait, or there was an epidemic of premature firstborn infants in colonial New England.
Yep. See the old Puritan custom of “bundling.” Not to mention that in Puritan society, an engagement was considered as binding as marriage, so a lot of engaged couples said, “Well, since being engaged is pretty much the same thing …” When he wasn’t persecuting “witches,” Cotton Mather spent a lot of his time trying to convince his flock that they should wait until the actual marriage ceremony. He had about as much luck with that as he did proving that witches really exist.
Most of our current sexual attitudes — especially the hypocrisy and repression-as-”self-control” — actually date to the Victorians, not the Puritans. The Puritans actually get kind of a bad rap when it comes to sex, at least when compared to the majorly effed-up Victorians. At least the Puritans acknowledged that women should enjoy sex, too, unlike the whole Victorian “angel in the home” thing.
Now having said that. Celibacy is a great way to live for periods of time, especially when combined with quality sex toys. I don’t get why a defense of sexual activity requires an attack on abstinence.
I think the Victorians bad rap as well. But that’s a topic for another time.
Well then you’ll just have to speak to the Muslim women I speak too. When they get together you might be surprised what they talk about, and the advise they give.
Yes it’s these silly texts that are part of the problem BUT these people believe in them so I think it’s helpful to know where they are coming from.
This article is just gross. I love the flowery language of purity, true love, and god to dress up the ugly goal: Trap the little ladies in marriage, little education and eventually a slew of young children. So, when she does finally think about her situation or what she and her husband have in common -there is no way out.
Well I was trying to make the connection, maybe badly, that unlike my readings of the Bible, the Quran atleast grants “sexual being” status to women.
Since there is no gender specific attribution to “masterbation is okay to keep you away from sinning” and women are granted status as sexual beings - I think that masterbation isn’t granted only to men.
This is genuinely creepy, so much so that I’m not going to go into it. It’s been covered already.
But!
the opoponax:
I am married, and Da Spouse asked, not my father, but my sister — well, he didn’t so much ask permission as get an outside opinion on it.
I’d been engaged once before, and that guy *did* ask my dad. Glad that didn’t work out for him. Following traditional roles to the letter probably means I was too non-traditional for him; you know, that whole “I’m thinking for myself, thank you,” bit.
NBarnes:
That was my first thought after I read the last paragraph of Amanda’s post, and I was surprised not to read it there first!
Although, as I think about it, the important point is probably not that they saved their virginity for each other, but that she saved hers for him. It’s the sacrifice of her holy virginity that she’s banking will preserve this marriage, not his lack of sexual experience.
After reading the article itself, I found very familiar the echoing replies Lauren gave to any question about how the sex was, or even how the relationship was. It sounded like she was repeating her training, not actually expressing herself.
Okay, done for now. Back to reading comments.
grendelkhan -
He didn’t hear voices, he was being “guided.” Haven’t you seen the movie “Ratatouille?”
I certainly never said that Muslim women never masturbate. Just that their religion and the dominant patriarchal culture probably doesn’t explicitly mandate it. A great many people do a great many things they’re not “supposed” to do. Don’t give the credit to the patriarchal and anti-sex culture they’re a part of, give it to the women who are willing to be open and rebellious.
The whole patriarch / faith thing scares me. Didn’t at least one Bible patriarch get down to making babies with his own daughters?
They would disagree with you. They see what you call “rebellion” as written into their “Allah given rights” as spelled out in the Quran and Hadith.
Okay, here’s the thing - I’m in my twenties, about to graduate, and “get self hitched” is not at the top of my to-do list. (And no, I’m not waiting till marriage, though I do seem to be experiencing a hiatus until the expectations around dating stop pissing me off).
But if I were looking into matrimony? Especially at my age? I think I would want my parent’s input. Because they know me, and they know a lot more about marriage than I do, and if they got to know my potential spouse and were all “Purpleshoes, you might want to wait or reconsider” I would hope that I would be, yes, humble enough to listen to them.
But trusting your parents’ opinion is different than being handed off from father to husband. I’m often quite impressed by how much my view of family life looks like a fundie’s, except for the part where we’re not all oppressed in my version.
Okay, here’s the thing - I’m in my twenties, about to graduate, and “get self hitched” is not at the top of my to-do list. (And no, I’m not waiting till marriage, though I do seem to be experiencing a hiatus until the expectations around dating stop pissing me off).
But if I were looking into matrimony? Especially at my age? I think I would want my parent’s input. Because they know me, and they know a lot more about marriage than I do, and if they got to know my potential spouse and were all “Purpleshoes, you might want to wait or reconsider” I would hope that I would be, yes, humble enough to listen to them.
But trusting your parents’ opinion is different than being handed off from father to husband. I’m often quite impressed by how much my view of family life looks like a fundie’s, except for the part where we’re not all oppressed in my version.
p.s. This anti-spam thingie is wicked difficult to post past, so apologies if I accidentally double-post.
YOu know what really bothers me, her parents, her dad keeps talking about how fragile she is… they’ve kept her that way, what happens when a real crisis comes?
Her heart is fragile
Well isn’t everyone’s heart fragile … has they given her coping skills? No he has kept her in that state and pushed the responsibility for it on to her now husband.
What was that song “heart so fragile and heavy to hold I was afraid I might break it” ???
ack .. I didn’t proof all the way through “have they given her coping skills?”
But if I were looking into matrimony? Especially at my age? I think I would want my parent’s input. Because they know me, and they know a lot more about marriage than I do, and if they got to know my potential spouse and were all “Purpleshoes, you might want to wait or reconsider” I would hope that I would be, yes, humble enough to listen to them.
I think this is pretty apt, actually. One thing I’ve learned in my years of stupid relationship choices is that usually your family and close friends tend to know whether someone is a good match for you. So I do listen to them, and I’d think it odd if they were all suspiciously silent about what they thought of a relationship serious enough to involve talk of marriage. I’d also be unlikely to seriously consider marrying someone whose family I hadn’t met, or who hadn’t met my parents.
But. Butbutbut. There’s a VAST difference between “So, Dad, what do you think of Potential Mr. Opoponax?” and “Dad of Opoponax, I’d like to marry your daughter.” Namely, one of those conversations involves me, and the other doesn’t.
Ack … looks like on comment 115 the end of my post got cut off … here we go:
***********************
Honestly, I can’t help but think that the two of them (although, probably Brett, as Lauren doesn’t get a say in the whole sex thing apparently) seriously couldn’t wait to fuck, and so just did the marriage thing in order to get to teh sex.
I am sure that some virgins can have incredible awesome sex. I’d be shocked to hell, but I am sure theoretically it’s possible. However, it’s pretty much a recipe for disaster otherwise.
Seven weeks? The woman I end up dating might get to have a toothbrush at my place by that point …
Why did God make sex feel so good?
It wasn’t god it was SATAN
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6932458727326137050&q=Dana+Church+Lady&total=25&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0
I got to a late start myself, never, uh… “played the field” much before getting married. Not due to religious reasons, but due to shyness (I’m over it now). Married relatively young for these days too; 25. My wife is two years older than me though, unlike the typical marriage which these people “save themselves” for.
My daughter is only nine months old now, but I’ve already mentioned to my wife that the guy who asks my permission to marry her is the one who doesn’t have it. Opinions I can give, permission I can’t.
Talking to my mother, she was observing that parents behave differently if their child is a boy or a girl. I was saying that I don’t get the reason for it, and she elaborated that her sister is always worrying about her daughter as far as boyfriends and dating goes (I’m one of two boys, my mother never had any daughters).
So I voiced the opinion that I’m not too worried about when that day comes. Says my mother, “Because you’re planning to teach her to make good decisions for herself?” My response was “Exactly so.” Educate your children as best you can, and trust them to make good decisions. Easier to say than do, but better than treating daughters as property transferred from father to husband.
I was about 3 weeks overdue and born six months after my parent’s wedding (and over 9 lbs) and my mom swears that one of the older women in her church commented, in a catty sort of way, on how well developed I was for a premie. It wasn’t just puritans who have ‘premature’ babies. It’s pretty much everyone in any culture where single parenthood is frowned on.
You know, I also have to say, as lesbian, the whole waiting till marriage thing seems a tad disingenuous on the part of the christian fundies, since they are also the ones that lead the charge for us not to get married.
Kinda working hard to dissuade the queers from waiting to marriage, aren’t they?
Course, I must be seriously tainted according to these people, as I lost track of partners somewhere in the mid teens number-wise, and that was years ago … though, does it count if all but two of them were women?
Do I get a “get out of jail free card” if it’s almost just been entirely women, regardless of number? Because I’d totally play my ‘almost a virgin’ card then
It would kinda be like fat-free/sugar-free slutting then … all the taste, none of the calories!
ks, queen mother of the peach pie -
There is an old saying
“Second and third children take nine months, the first can come at any time.
“the guy who asks my permission to marry her is the one who doesn’t have it.”
hee hee! so then he’s *not* allowed to marry her because you withheld your permission?
Is it wrong that after I read this, I immediately thought, “Yeah, yeah, wait a year and then we’ll see.”
Oh, and purpleshoes20: I understand about wanting your parents’ input- if I were in any sort of serious relationship at this point in my life, I’d do the same thing. But it’s something that you ask for, and you have the option to take their advice or not- we’re talking about some random guy going up to your dad and asking him if he can boink you. That’s what’s frakked up.
I also suppose the type of idiot who would ask the father for permission would also take ‘you do not have my permission to marry my daughter’ as meaning the dad had withheld permission and the marriage wasn’t going to happen.
Denying permission to a possible future in law could be a good way to ensure that the person being proposed to would be the one asked. If the daughter is asked, its not a problem. If the person not getting married is asked, its a problem and they should be discouraged.
If that makes any sense.
“Lauren Wilson Black”? Wilson Black? Somehow I doubt that she would keep her name like that.
Wow! might have been the accomodations. The Broadmoor is a high-end hotel, perhaps comparable to the RitzCarltons, Plaza Hotel NYC, etc. During the off season, or on an as-available basis, many high-end hotels offer weekend packages that are surprisingly affordable.
@ Bridgetka — your maiden name becoming your middle name upon marriage is a common tradition in a lot of US regions that should not be confused with hyphenation or any other attempt to “keep one’s name”. My mom did this (as part of tradition) when she got married, and she’s as anti name-keeping as they come.
You mind me asking if she’s got a reason why she is such, opoponax?
This is something I honestly am never going to grok … sure, I’d like the same name as the woman who is insane enough to want to marry me, and even then I’m a tad resistant, but why is it always the woman in heterosexual relationships that needs to do this?
My sister did this, and I still don’t really get it.
My best friend and I have often joked on the serious that when looking for potential partners, it would be best to look for some cool people old enough to be parents of said potentials, then ask if they have kids. We’re all slowly turning into a slightly mutated version of our parents, at least you could have some idea about the potential partner’s personality as it might be in years to come.
Not exactly asking my parents for dating advice, but something along the same lines that makes even more sense to me.
@ Sarah in Chicago:
Shorter My Mom: Totally Not A Feminist.
Longer My Mom: As far as I can tell, she’s for taking your husband’s name because “it’s just what you do”, also due to fears about the parents and children having different last names (though this didn’t keep her from taking my stepfather’s last name, even though they’ve never considered having children together), “it shows a strong commitment”, and basically all the typical reasons someone who’s never really thought much about it one way or another but is conservative in the classic sense of not seeing the point of questioning or changing whatever is traditional.
Just to clarify, my mother and I do not see eye to eye on this particular issue. I will NEVER change my name for marital/relationship reasons. OK, I’d consider both of us changing to a totally different name. But that’s it. And it would have to be a really, really good name.
I wonder how many oxen he had to give her Dad when they got married?
That’s actually what I mean (re: parental input vs. parental permission). The “family values”, men-are-the-gods-of-the-dinner-table crowd like to act like they’ve cornered the market on leading family-centered lives - but in reality, we all know that there are a lot more models of family-centered lives than “God makes one person the boss and everyone obeys him”. I don’t need God to make my father my spiritual leader or my mother my - what, role model of handmaidenship? - in order for me to respect my parents and value their opinions and their role in my (adult) life.
In fact, their respect for my agency and autonomy, as an adult daughter, is part of our family life, not something that runs contrary to our existence as a family. And that’s something that familial fundamentalists, I think, tend not to get. I think the lifestyle continuum tends to get painted as a choice between keeping your daughters under your / their husband’s thumb their whole lives or having them end up on Skid Row, or, at best, moving to the city, never calling you, and rejecting everything you taught them. The possibility for change to not equal rejection is not acknowledged as much as it should be.
I’m already into tl;dr territory, so I’ll stop now.
p.s. While I like having double last names, what am I supposed to do when I have kids? (we have discussed this before, I think). Toss one of my parent’s surnames overboard in favor of my coparent’s? Alternate surnames from kid to kid? (my parent’s favorite option until they accidentally had an odd number) Reproduce via technology so as to avoid the whole issue? This last option is looking tempting: I can make a good argument for not naming a kid Child Shoes-Donor#546F.
And let’s complicate matters: so far, many of the women I’ve met who I would seriously consider having as mother-in-laws have kept their surnames and hyphenated their children’s surnames. This means the surname burden accrued by each subsequent generation could grow exponentially.
Old landgrant families in Virginia sometimes get around this (I think due more to blue-bloodedness than gender equality) by making a particularly prestigious grandmother’s maiden name a first name.
“Why hang out with a guy, break your heart, hang out with the next guy, break your heart again?””
What a terrible, life-denying sentiment. I’ve had my heart broken, and my pride bruised, and my trust shaken a lot of times, but wanting never to experience freedom because you might get hurt is like wishing you didn’t have a sense of smell because there are skunks as well as roses.
And most importantly, if you’ve had your heart broken, you know it can mend. I adore my boyfriend and I reckon we’re together for good - but if he ran off with someone else or became a violent alcoholic or died in a freak toaster mishap (this last is much the most likely of the three), at least I know that I can scrape myself back together and be as ‘whole’ as ever with enough time and friends to cry at.
And I hope he feels the same about me.
Sarah in Chicago,
Married couples taking the same name is an anthropological phenomenon that is universal — so as to have a, you know, discernible family lineage.
There are many documented matrilineal societies. Examples — the Minangkabau culture of West Sumatra; the Nairs, Bunts and Kurichiyas of Kerala, India; the Khasi and Garo of Meghalaya, India; the Naxi of China; the Gitksan of British Columbia; the Iroquois; the Hopi; and the Berbers.
In a post-modern world, we could easily do away with this, but the question would still remain as to which name the kids would take.
i have a hyphenated last name and it is a big ol’ pain in the ass. when i work up the energy, i am going to change it to my husband’s last name. i just don’t care anymore if my last name is my husband’s family name or my father’s - what’s the real difference?
Our child’s last name is my husband’s - but i think we were given the option of the hyphenated name - can’t remember.
This is my mother (and father, to a large extent). Anything I do or believe that is not exactly what they do or believe, they see as a repudiation of themselves, as if the only reason I could be different was just to spite them.
Amanda @ 112: I did also have a friend who refused to wear the engagement ring until he’d talked to her father. The most I got out of her was “It’s about respect.” So yeah, I think it is about showing that he’s enough of a grown-up to be nice to her parents.
There was a lot more going on there — her father was the only living member of her immediate family, she was very close to him and I think she wanted to ensure that he didn’t feel like she was running away from him. I think another part of it is “I want him to build some kind of a relationship with my side of the family and not be a total stranger,” and asking your father’s permission is viewed as symbolic of that, especially if you have barely met each other’s parents.
I’d say it’s much more ideal to actually build the relationship with each other’s parents. But what do I know. After all, I don’t have the all-important wedding ring, so clearly I’m useless!
MissPrism, IAWTC. I got my heart completely destroyed by my first boyfriend, but that experience was really crucial in making me who I am today. I wanted to marry him; the only thing stopping us was that we were 15. Thank God we didn’t have parents who would have given us permission. I can’t imagine what it would be like if I’d married him. SO messed up.
Most women I know kept their own names after marrying but legally took the husband’s name when the kid came — still retaining their original name for professional purposes and existing accounts with credit-card companies, video stores, etc.
It does seem a hyphenated name would be a pain in the ass. Maybe the husband should have to take his wife’s last name as his new middle name — thus “John Ono Lennon” and “Yoko Ono Lennon.”
Shit, I’m old enough to remember when some women would sign their correspondence “Mrs. William Smith.” It was a creepy archaism even in the mid-70s. You still see it once in a blue moon.
Yeah. One time, my husband’s aunt recounted the story of how her parents (DH’s grandparents) met. Her father and her mother’s father were coalminers together, and great-grandpa invited grandpa home to dinner one night to meet his several daughters. After dinner:
Great Grandpa: So, what do you think of my girls?
Grandpa: Fine.
Great Grandpa: See anything you like?
Grandpa: I like Lucia.
Great Grandpa: Eh, how about Carmella? She’s the oldest one still left at home.
Grandpa: Fine.
And that’s the story of how Grandpa and Grandma fell in love. Of course, this was over sixty years ago, and they were immigrants who were culturally still back in the Old World, but hey. Details.
You know, as a sociologist, I have to call bullshit on the ‘universal’ … nothing is actually universal.
However, to the gist of what you were saying, I understand the social construction of name useage, my question was rather focused on individual woman and why they would do so. Why can’t we have a society where it’s considered a good thing that half the time a man take’s his spouse’s name?
Personally, I am in favour of doing what the mayor of LA did, namely took a portion of his last name, took a portion of his wife’s last name, and made one new name out of both portions, which their children also took.
Married couples taking the same name is an anthropological phenomenon that is universal — so as to have a, you know, discernible family lineage.
No, it’s not. Three major reasons.
A — not all societies have surnames. In fact, this didn’t even show up in European society until relatively recently (even the first European surnames, which come from old Irish clans, aren’t recorded until the 14th century). And a great many non-European societies were forced to take surnames due to colonialism.
B — even in European societies which are almost overwhelmingly patrilineal, the preference for the father’s surname to the exclusion of other surnames is not even nearly universal. In Icelandic culture (which is not AFAIK matrilineal at all), matronymics are not uncommon. In Hispanic culture, you get both parents’ names.
C — patrilinial naming conventions just plain aren’t a cultural universal. I majored in anthropology in college. The list of cultural universals is quite short. Patrilineal naming conventions ain’t on it.
my great grandparents were third cousins…
Oh, and another thing — not all cultures that use patrilineal naming conventions have the tradition of a wife taking on the husband’s family name. China, for instance.
I love how I just bragged about being an anthro major and misspelled “patrilineal” in the same post.
That’s okay opoponax, we sociologists make allowances for you anthros
Well OK. I guess I’ll excuse your silly little sociology-inspired comment about how there are no universals…
;)
I didn’t say patrilineal naming conventions were universal — I said “taking the same name” is universal. Did you read it? Christ, I even listed some examples of matrilineal cultures (I had forgotten about Icelandic).
Still, I’m wrong, of course, for the reasons you pointed out, but as much as anything I just sloppily stated it — I should have said “establishing lineage through a gender-based protocol is universal.”
lol opoponax, I was wondering if anyone would pick up on that
“establishing lineage through a gender-based protocol is universal.”
gah, again, there is no such thing as a cultural universal.
We can say “the far majority” or even “nearly all”, but you can’t say “universal” because we haven’t studied every culture on earth, and it’s simply an extremely weak argument to make, because all someone that argues differently needs to do is find one example.
(run on sentences though, I do seem to be in favour of … my apolos)
Come on, it’s the other side that is supposed to be the ones that reject reason and science.
In response to Rachel a while back, it’s more like my permission or lack thereof is largely irrelevant to whom my daughter marries (or doesn’t marry, whatever she likes really). I’d be kind of horrified if her boyfriend thought it was important, and likely express that opinion to her. She could still marry him, I’d just like him less.
But of course, this is all academic at this point, as she’s still an infant.
Rock on, MissPrism — That’s exactly my sentiment.
i know matthew. it was just a funny consequence that made me giggle.
Another word about “universals” … it’s true that the list is small — three items — but the subject at hand falls with the domain of the list. To wit:
1) People are members of some family, clan, etc.
2) There are rules about who you can and can’t fuck.
3) People break the rules about who they can and can’t fuck.
I’m still sort of amazed that you can get your cats into the little tuxedos. When I was a little girl, I tried to put doll clothes on our cats and make them ride in the doll buggy. Let’s just say that was not successful.
My mom (and grandmother too!) kept her last name when she married, and my parents decided when my mom was pregnant with my older brother that boys would have my dad’s name, and girls would take my mom’s name. Simple enough. Of course brothers and sisters don’t share a last name (causing occasional confusion*), but I think it’s worth dealing with it in order to spit in the face of the patriarchy.
*though this level of confusion is no worse than the dumbfucks who can’t make the connection that my parents are still married, despite having different last names. Seriously, when they open bank accounts, etc, they get the dumbest people.
“So you want to open an account with your ex? I see you still have the same address though. So…so you live with your ex wife, and want a bank account with her? Why aren’t you still married?!”
whether a person will have a surname, where that surname will come from, and what happens to their surname upon marriage are in no way covered by any item in that list, period (or any item on the real life list of cultural universals, which your list does not represent accurately).
also, #3 is not a part of the list of human universals.
It would be if we rephrased it as “Every society produces rules for behavior which, when broken, give rise to the various phenomena known as ‘deviance.’”
I said “taking the same name” is universal.
that’s very cute, but “taking the same name” is even less universal than the handing down of surnames patrilineally.
Did you read it?
yes. however, you are still 100% totally wrong, on every level. you are about as right on this point as i would be if i said “I said ‘the sky’ is orange. Did you read it?”
Christ, I even listed some examples of matrilineal cultures (I had forgotten about Icelandic).
Icelandic society is not matrilineal. Neither is that of Spain or Latin America.
Please go look up the terms “matrilineal” and “cultural universal”, and then maybe we can discuss this.
“It was incredible,” Lauren says of losing her virginity.
I have heard some lies in my life, and that one is definitely in the top three.
And that’s the story of how Grandpa and Grandma fell in love.
I’m still floored that a couple of generations ago it was normal for most people to be in arranged/opportunistic marriages, and for some people it still is. I think I’d rather go without indoor plumbing than live like that.
Ooooo, very nicely phrased Jeff hon
So, I read this, and I thought, “Oh, that’s really interesting, that her mother never taught her that boys who tell girls “they will love them forever” are just trying to get into her pants. She honestly believes that her virginity before marriage somehow makes him impervious to the temptation to cheat on her or dump her. She also seems to have decided that a female’s worth can be determined by the status of her hymen. Since she no longer has hers, if her husband leaves her, or god forbid, should die in a plane crash (he’s a pilot, remember), then she’ll be worthless in the marriage market and has no hope of ever getting another husband ever again. EVER.”
Then I shrugged and sighed to myself as I thought smugly, “Ah well, with the way the Republicans are slashing welfare benefits, it’s pretty unlikely that I’ll be the one supporting Lauren’s uneducated self and her invariable litter of children that she’ll no doubt be left with after Brett flies off to younger models…I mean greener pastures. If she seeks any help from anybody other than her father, however, I’d like to have my tax money back that President Bush used to promote the abstinence-only programs that brought about Lauren’s backward way of thinking. No wonder she couldn’t get into college.”
This engagement story reminded me of this quote:
Lady Bracknell. To speak frankly, I am not in favour of long engagements. They give people the opportunity of finding out each other’s character before marriage, which I think is never advisable.
Thanks, but it’s still a little off. The breaking of rules doesn’t give rise to deviance, it’s the breaking of the rules that is deviance. In other words, every society produces and institutionalizes deviance (might be a better way of stating it).
Well, one could say, in a foucauldian sense, that in the very act of constructing rules, every society creates deviance.
I dunno if that’s so much Foucauldian, since I think Becker and Merton and Collins and Durkheim and … would have said the same thing. But, yeah.
Purpleshoes, I know a family that did this. The parents each kept their own name, and the kids alternated. They knew they didn’t want more than two, but in case of surprises they’d agreed to either hyphenate or flip a coin. Part of the reason, I think, is because the woman was the last in her branch of the family, and wanted to pass on the family name… something I’ve given thought to myself, as I’m the only one in this branch of the family to still carry the surname. (Dad only had sisters, and my grandfather’s brother only had daughters, all of whom changed their names. And before anyone asks “what about my mom’s maiden name” - her brother had a son. Who’s now only got a daughter, but that’s her worry when she grows up, and she’s four.)
Especially Merton, who basically said that if you tell a kid he’s a deviant over and over, he’ll internalize the message and grow up to be a deviant.
This thread jumped the shark at the mention of post-modernism.
Pro Tip: The word “post-modern” means exactly nothing.
the opoponax: “I will NEVER change my name for marital/relationship reasons. OK, I’d consider both of us changing to a totally different name. But that’s it. And it would have to be a really, really good name.”
Since this has become a topic, I’d like to put my two cents in regarding surnames. When I got married, my wife didn’t want my name and I didn’t care. Then we adopted our daughter and suddenly she wanted us all to have the same name. She grew up with a different name from her divorced and remarried mother, hated the constant explanations, and felt that it would help with the adoption (our daughter was six when adopted, so this could have been important to her as well.) Then, I had a major falling out with my father and we all sought a new family name. We had a lot of options: hyphenation (which sounded like a skin disease or psychological disorder, “Alas! not Gigicon-Karki Syndrome!”) taking hers (not ideal, since we had been down that road already,) using foreign words for family (those sucked,) or making up something. We made it up: Meade is Mom, Ethan, Alicia, Dad, Et cetera. And it’s a keeper even as we are separated and on the road to divorce. Maybe I’ll change it to Solo, but that’s already taken.
And it’s spelled “masturbation” folks. Think turbo and turgid and turbulence and you shouldn’t have much trouble remembering. Now the karma-check can take place and I’ll soon hear what I’ve misspelled lately.
I don’t think you’re a spelling-Nazi, jon. Masturbation is one of those words that I just hate to see mispelled because there’s something about Masterbation that reminds me of Margaret Cho’s stand-up routine where she’s discussing her mother’s confusion about the purpose of the “ass master” product, and even goes so far as to ask, “Is it a Master of the Ass????”
And that just makes me sad that we can’t rationally discuss anal self-stimulation without someone invariably coming along and saying, “Ewww! You do THAT???”
And that’s just tragic, IMHO. YMMV.
MAJeff, I just wanted to send a compliment your way and let you know I contemplated the idea of deviance as a cultural universal all the way home from work on the subway. Thanks for making me think!
Lots of good comments here, and just had to add a couple of my own. If it seems random, that’s because it is.
Traditional 1950’s way a boy asked his girlfriend to marry him:
“You’re what?”
Deployment: Got to tell the navy way.
Ships are tied to a pier using 6 lines, doubled up for strength. The order given that indicates that, yes, this ship is going out to sea *right now* is “Single up all lines!” Some married men also claimed that the order was “Single up all spouses!” “What happens west of the International Date Line doesn’t violate your vows” was another line I heard.
One of the great bizarro things that human males (like myself) seem to desire is the virgin whore: the girl who has never done anything, but will (willingly!) with you. I don’t know if it’s cultural, psychological, hard wired into the genes… but nothing (almost nothing) turns me on more than a woman’s voice saying ‘oh, I never done *this* before!’ It doesn’t even matter if I know she’s lying. My wife figured this out a few years ago, and says it ocassionally. And *this* can be almost anything sexual… sex on the couch, foreplay in the car, shower mutual fondling… I know she’s done it before, she’s done it with ME before, but she says those words and I react.
OK, so, I’m a pervert.
The tradition of the engagement ring is also part of the ‘virginity’… it comes from the assumption that the girl will lose her virginity before the wedding but after getting the ring, and if the groom breaks it off she’s compensated for the loss by the ring.
“An eager young bride can accomplish in 6 months what it takes a long married woman 9″ is an old saying. I’m tempted to say it’s Irish (since I heard it from Irish relatives).
I’m taking a survey:
Who thinks Brett was a virgin before the wedding?
Who thinks Brett will be faithful for the next 10 years?
Who thinks Brett will by unfaithful with another man?
Who thinks Lauren will be faithful for the next 10 years?
Enquiring minds.
My wife was not a virgin when I married her. Heck, she wasn’t a virgin when I met her. Nor was I. My daughter wasn’t a virgin when she married either. And this obsession with it isn’t healthy.
“Every society produces rules for behavior which, when broken, give rise to the various phenomena known as ‘deviance.’”
This sentence was much cooler when I initially misread ‘various’ as ‘glamorous’
Well, one could say, in a foucauldian sense, that in the very act of constructing rules, every society creates deviance.
That’s right out of the Tao Teh Ching, btw. The more rulebound you find a society, the less truly moral it is, and also the more energy you will find people putting into making loopholes around the rules, and the more veneration for empty forms and obsessing over enforcing them on everyone else.
Lao Tzu was a very observant fellow…
One of the great bizarro things that human males (like myself) seem to desire is the virgin whore: the girl who has never done anything, but will (willingly!) with you. I don’t know if it’s cultural, psychological, hard wired into the genes
It’s the assurance that she won’t be comparing you to anyone else and finding that you come up wanting. No one wants to be a forgettable or inferior sex partner, so there’s nothing mysterious about that. The trouble comes when people start to think men are entitled to be protected from all possible pain or embarrassment by depriving women of sexual experience, because they’re only women, after all, and a man’s feelings are at stake here.
In the immortal words of David Gates and Bread:
Lotta people have an ego hangup ‘cause they want to be the only one
How many came before it really doesn’t matter just as long as you’re the last.
I love the seventies.
Well, I did initially think of Becker, but then I prefer the constitutive nature of Foucault’s framing, rather than the representative nature of the previous.
Three things, briefly.
1/The whole puritan thing–I think something like just over half of the women were pregnant at their weddings–was as much economic as anything. Dad didn’t want to split up his farm, as he had to in order for the young couple to have their start, so the couple would “force” the issue.
2/Sarah: I have to say, a refreshing change from the stereotypical lesbian relationship junkie. (You know the second-date U-Haul joke.) Then @37: Susie Ormond certainly claimed that exact argument visavis lesbian and virginity.
and 3/apropos of little or nothing…my little rescue ferret was named Foucault as a h/t to a theory class I was suffering at the time. He only lived just over a year, but at least we made him happy–probably not as happy as he made us (although no tuxedos were involved).
I had a hamster named Baudrillard. I was going to have to take him to Minnesota with me when I moved back from Rhode Island, but I woke up the morning we were to start driving back and he had died.
I’m not sure I see what you mean by “representative” nature. I think someone like Becker (or Berger) would recognize that boundary drawing/work is constitutive of deviance.
I’m pretty sure my mom was a virgin on her wedding night–she claims that their first kiss was a few nights before their wedding, just so that they wouldn’t be kissing for the first time at the wedding. Not so sure about my dad, who didn’t convert to my mom’s conservative brand of religion until a few years before they met. They have this odd combination of repression and honesty about sexual topics–they have always tried to be open and honest and realistic about everything in their lives (long before we left the conservative group they raised us kids in, they’d decided to go out of their way not to speak “Christianese”), but I guess the conditioning about sex is pretty strong. My mom may not realize that it’s her wonderful insistence that we grow up and become our own true selves that has led a couple of her kids to have premarital sex, and not always with the approved gender. If she did, she might blame herself more than she does…
All of which is to say that I spent my childhood assuming that all the engaged couples I knew were waiting for marriage, and didn’t stop to think that it might be hard on them, or to wonder if they really were waiting. (It wasn’t until years later that I heard about the divorces or the children born conveniently less than nine months after teh wedding.) So I understand Lauren’s assumption that she would stay a virgin–but even so, this weird weird thing that her prospective husband would consider her and her sisters all alike is disturbing! The being turned over to her husband from her father is extremely creepy as well, and yeah, what people upthread said about footwashing supposed to be done by the powerful partner. (The whole point of Jesus washing his disciples’ feet was to shock the hell out of them with the idea that the master would serve his servants like that, and shake up their ideas about power structures. Disturbing that such a wonderfully subversive thing gets twisted like this.)
On the subject of last names, I really like the idea of naming one’s sons after their father and one’s daughters after their mother. I tried to do a family tree recently, tried to figure out what my surname would be if our family had done that (of course, after a few generations back the surnames I have for my grandmothers are only their married names), and it was fascinating. It restructures how you think of who’s related to who, in this really interesting way. Anyway, I’m not planning on getting married any time soon, but if I do I just might keep my name because no other women on either side of the family has done so….
(Or of course one could name one’s sons after their mother, and one’s daughters after their father. That could be interesting too. Hmm.)
(Why is Pandagon giving me anti-spam captchas to type? I hope I haven’t pissed off the bakery gods!)
clytemnestra: Hindu’s may have secual hang-ups but for years the tradition was to give the kama sutra as a wedding present to the bride and groom …. think the fundies do that?
The Karma Sutra was originally written as a manual of sex advice to adult men marrying little girls - ten or even younger.
Given a culture which takes for granted that adult men do marry little girls, it sort of walks the line between utterly creepy and almost endearing that someone decided it was important that, if a little girl was going to have to have sex with an adult man, the adult man should have an idea of sexual things to do that wouldn’t cause the little girl horrible pain.
Raised in a culture which finds the idea of putting a little girl in bed with an adult man as wife and husband completely repugnant, the Karma Sutra falls over the line into creepy, for me.
Well I personally am of the opinion that the Kama Sutra was intended for use with courtesans, not one’s wife. Hindustani culture has all the very same “madonna/whore” issues western culture does.
I stand corrected… but I refuse to feel indigidation against Hindus for sex with young girls and exclude my own country.
When reading Laura Ingalls Wilder when I was younger I was struck by passages where LIW talked about friends being married off at 12 and 13 . . . some how that seems to be missed when fingers get pointed at other cultures.
On universals.
Clearly there are universals. We all have DNA. We all breath oxygen. There are also near-universals, e.g. we have two limbs and two eyes.
There are exceptions such as those born eyeless or limbless, but it seems reasonable to describe those people as malformed. No less human, or anything like that, but in those specific respects deficient. It’s dishonest to pretend otherwise.
There are other attributes that are non-universal, e.g. the correlation between sex and gender. That makes complete sense to me. These variations have complex effects and cannot sensibly be labelled as more or less human, though their rarity may confer advantage making certain people seem superior. I think this is an illusion of expectation.
But it seems likely to me, and I cannot discount it, that there are also intermediate variations that are less obvious, but are deficiencies. I don’t think we can even know what they are: e.g. sickle-cell anemia seems like a deficiency, but protects against malarial parasites as the easily collapsed cells kill them before they can hijack their workings.
However, I suggest such deficiencies exist. That is there are necessarily invariant properties within the parameters of what the gene pool of the human species allows to be expressed.
It seems implausible to me that these do not extend to the structure and the operation of the brain and thus the mind and (perhaps narrowly limited) aspects of human interaction when they so clearly do to the structure and operation of the body. That said, there is much of society that exists outside the human body. Is this what you think prevents universals from existing– external influences pushing the parameters one way or the other?
We all have DNA. We all breath oxygen. There are also near-universals, e.g. we have two limbs and two eyes.
Hence the social science clarification “cultural universals”.
Which do exist. All humans have language, art, family structures, marriage (to an extent, and depending on how you define the term), cuisine/food prep/cooking, religion/philosophy/metaphysics, etc. the incest taboo is a commonly cited universal, though i think that one in particular is a little shakier than the others for a variety of reasons.
@ me, in reference to a post in moderation:
to clarify, the above conversation about universality pertains to humans within societies/cultures, not humans individually. These qualities may be connected in some way we don’t yet understand with biology — in the case of language, we know this to be the case. But social scientists generally aren’t overly interested in asking what biological structure accounts for the universality of art or music.
This would be the area of deviance, would it not. Every society sets rules for behavior and punishment (of a wide variety of forms) for breaking them….deviance. Whether or not it need be incest, there is deviance.
I’m posting anonymously in case I want to live this down later.
The thing that puzzles me about fundamentalists in the military is that military people are the sluttiest people alive. I used to frequent a sex club that was driving distance from a military base, and half the people there were from the military. The most interesting were the wives whose husbands were deployed, who would club to the club alone to get laid. I thought it showed a sophisticated understanding of human behavior. No one wants to go a year plus without having sex, so a sex club is a safe way to have sex without risking your relationship.
Also, I thought Hawker Hurricaine’s story about how his wife could get him exciting by telling him she’d never done something before, even though he knew perfectly well she had, totally hott.
Eh? I’ve been involved in countless Hindu weddings, and I’ve seen the bride’s parents wash the groom’s feet, the groom put toe-rings on the bride’s toes, and the bride’s friends run off with the groom’s shoes, but I’ve never seen a single instance of the bride kissing the groom’s feet, even among people who went with the ultra-traditional three-day ceremony.
When it comes to arranged marriages (and make no mistake, Lauren had an arranged marriage), they work best when the participants go into them with fairly modest expectations. Either the couple settles into a steady, companionable relationship, in which case they’re not disappointed because they weren’t expecting grand passion, or they really do have the heady, woozy falling-in-love experience after marriage, which comes as a pleasant surprise. A fundie who believes in true love is going to end up bitterly disappointed in the stranger that daddy picked for her.
I will confirm the story about military wives with their husbands on deployment. It was well known there were easy pick ups in the clubs just off base the night the ships left.
So yes, both military men and thier wives were fooling around on each other. And fundamentalist men were among the worst. Ask me about the ship’s corpman who tried to convert everyone and self treated himself for STD’s after every port.
But the thing that both creeps me out and saddens me at the same time, is the fact that her first kiss was at 22…
Steady now. Some of us are 22 and haven’t had a first kiss yet (unless you count drunken nightclub stranger hijinx), and it has nothing to do with “waiting for marriage” or some other BS. Sometimes it’s hard/impossible to find someone who likes you back. Which gives lie to the whole “women have power! sexual power! They can seduce any man with their feminine wiles and that power has to be controlled!” crap.
But having your first kiss at your *wedding*…. Yes, that’s totally creepy.
Well, my very first PIV experience, which was also my first experience with doing anything sexual with a partner beyond just kissing (and those 2 experiences were fleeting and not part of a real relationship) was neither awkward nor disappointing. I am sure though that this was partially because my partner was experienced and forthright, and because I was probably as prepared as anyone could be by just booklearning and self-pleasuring and having pretty successfully jettisoned patriarchial hooey. I was also over 20. And of course being male I didn’t have the sheer anatomical issues I suppose are normal for a woman w/o that particular experience.
Demanding and getting a standard of total virginity for both partners prior to one, death-do-you part, marriage, is clearly a formula for awkwardness and disappointment, and a set-up for endless nagging curiousity about how much greener the grass might be over the next fence, even if by good fortune the two happen to be a good sexual match for each other. Demanding that only the woman meet this standard, which would allow for the possibility of a considerate husband bringing useful experience into the relationship, is an obvious crying injustice (which fundies and sexists in general attempt to pave over with ideologies about inherent differences between the desires of each sex) and seriously subverts the alleged pragmatic virtues of monogamy–since the men would occasionally have children by liasons with other women before marriage even if they stayed faithful after marriage, and venereal diseases would have an opportunity to spread.
OTOH a relaxed attitude toward premarital sex is a clear danger to patriarchial ideology–and only a danger to such ideologies, not one to a society that perhaps strongly values fidelity after a partnership is declared but not on patriarchial grounds.
In such a society, I suspect that a reasonable norm might be to expect and encourage short-term relationships between young adults and older ones, with due protection from possible predatory purposes of the latter. And of course in many societies it is accepted that young adults will experiment with sex with each other before choosing a final partner.
The madness of the “romantic” version of patriarchy (”There is One True Spouse for you out there; God or some vague stand-in for God will magically bring you together and signal you both”) is guaranteed to result in massive bad faith on all sides; either there is some kind of de facto arrangement going on or everyone is more or less cheating on the ideal. In its most sincere form it boils down to the idea of God, or perhaps the infallible wisdom of evolutionary psychology or some such scientistic theocracy, is in fact the great Matchmaker. Insofar as we get away from the structural bases and social reinforcements of patriarchy, which consistently makes women objects and not subjects, the myth falls apart, and the social factors that seek or tend blindly to enforce the myth are clearly reactionary.
I wish the term ‘abstinence’ meant that people abstained from divulging the intimate details of their sex lives, even non-existent ones. There is something genuinely creepy about proclaiming your virginity, since it only draws attention to your genitalia, forcing friends, family and strangers alike to think of you as a c**t in the literal sense of the term.