I saw an article on AOL about how the Candie's Foundation is causing a stir with a new shirt that has what they consider to be a slogan that supports abstinence -- or safer sex -- or something -- they don't seem sure.
Why do I feel like it all -- the whole foundation -- is just a stunt? It seems "sorta pushing abstinence, but actually acting like teens can truly make this life-altering decision to engage in this behavior" is the equivalent of breweries joining the "designated driver" bandwagon -- it's the hip thing to do, that tries to misdirect our attention from the problem they're part of.
When it comes right down to it -- it seems to me like this campaign is trying to reel in girls who are already too far in peril. Whether or not they have already had sex, they are already in a hypersexualized state where their identities are too far embroiled in "all things sexy."
Why are we trying to make abstinence "sexy"? Why can't abstinence just be what it is? The smartest, safest, all-around best way to go?
I don't let my girls watch shows or videos, buy clothes, or listen to songs that push them to grow up too fast. And I'm only about 90% successful, at best, considering how much is out there. I keep having to endure what I feel are very "pouty" pictures. Thankfully, despite what others may think when they see them -- they are not trying to be sexy or emulate characters from a tv show that has inappropriate content. They're just imitating the models in innocuous ads. (No Abercrombie catalogs -- or clothing -- in this house!)
They're not calling up or texting boys (although I have been unhappy with some networking comments) and they tell me when boys say rude things to them. They think boys are stupid -- and I intend to keep it that way for as long as I can. (I know that a part of them longs to have a boyfriend -- but it doesn't involve anything beyond innocent puppy love.)
It's no accident that I started from a young age to tell my girls that they are more than just a pretty face. And being pretty is not about make-up and sexy clothes. (Oh, and that boys lie. Even the good ones. They can't help themselves -- or more accurately, their raging hormones.)
Let's teach both girls and boys from the beginning that purity, prudence, and pride are to be valued. Trying to bring them back when they've already been overexposed -- that's one genie that will not get back in the bottle.
Yeah, I have to agree that the...is that style called a 'tank top'? (at least it doesn't bare the midriff) The form of the shirt and the emphasis on "Sexy" is not what I'd call a really abstinence oriented message.
And what is with the term "abstinence" anyway? Why has a strictly negative (and highly limited) term replaced the virtue of chastity? Chastity can be a part of your entire life...you can be chaste and married, having a relationship that is based on respect for personal and moral boundaries. Well, I suppose you could also be abstinent and married too, though that would seem to be rather pointless.
Why do most modern men seem to lack the confidence to view chastity as a desirable trait...well, I guess one only has to look at how little chance most modern men would have with even the most slightly discriminating woman to answer that question. I guess the question then is why any woman would even want to be with such a 'man'.
Of course, I'm not particularly chaste (even though I'm reasonably abstemious), and I value several other virtues (which I won't list here, though all told they do trend towards abstinence) more highly in women than chastity. I suppose that, for precisely those reasons, I more easily perceive the difference between abstinence and chastity. Abstinence can be a (frankly undesirable) side effect of other virtues (or of vices and deficiencies). Chastity is an unqualified virtue which is always good. It is what makes sexuality...intimate.
To desire to touch a woman's body without touching her heart...go play with dolls, you ****tards.
Posted by: ChunLing | August 11, 2009 at 11:51 AM