Friday, May 12, 2006

Bad Dads, No Biscuit

Mark Morford explains why real dads have real balls, not purity balls:

"Let's just say it: There is no sacredness in the virgin. There is only the fear, were she to be educated and empowered and really let loose, of what she could become." Read on. . .
How true that is. One of the church's biggest fears about The DaVinci Code is that it explores the possibility that Jesus wasn't a virgin. As if he couldn't be divine if he weren't a virgin.

It would be easy for us to ignore this now, since 3B is going to be a boy, and not subject to this socialization, which is really just a public social female genital mutilation. Just because we don't do the physical deed doesn't make it any less of an injury to the girl; in fact, it may make it worse, because the invisible wound more easily remains unseen or ignored.

We can't really ignore this, however, because 3B is going to be subject to similar socialization pressures as a boy. Which raises the obvious question: why aren't their purity balls for boys? Why, because real boys use their real balls, and that's the way our society likes it. We like our men unrestrained and libidinous, and our women modest and virginal.

Just as girls are forced into purity balls, the greatest effect of which seems to be mollifying their dads' fears, given the 88 percent failure rate of the vows, boys are too often pushed into "macho" activities that they don't want to pursue, many of which also can have dire consequences.

While we won't be the ones pushing toward these activities, it's frightening to think that social and peer pressure might have the same effect on 3B. And frightening to think of how we're all going to deal with these girls who have been publicly subjugated to the will of their fathers. Will they ever believe in themselves again? Will they ever be capable of believing in their own capacity for self-determination again? Will they ever see their own capacity for divinity again?

Thanks again to Zygote Daddy for reminding me of the goodness that is Mark Morford's column on SFGate.


  1. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  2. Interesting post. The whole father/daughter thing is creepy.

    I agree totally with your point about society wanting boys to use their balls and for girls to avoid them at all costs. What I've never understood, though, is who we think the boys should be sexing up since we're freaked out about them playing around with themselves or doing each other.

    I guess it's one of those zen mysteries.

  3. Perhaps a Zen riddle, or perhaps an extension of the slut/virgin double bind that society puts women in. If they're virgins, we revere them; if they have sex, they're sluts. Men, however, can have sex and still be revered. In fact, in some cases, the more sex a man has, the more he is revered, having proved his virility.

    The fathers with purity balls also seem to be oblivious to how their balls are just like the practices of ancient times, when men owned women, arranged their marriages, and dominated their lives. I'm not sure if they don't teach recent history in the areas where these fathers live, or if perhaps they only get the Fox network there. That's another riddle.

  4. I have a feeling that these fathers "cum balls" (as the say in Latin) understand to some extent that they are turning their daughters into property. My guess is that they believe this is the natural order. It's interesting that the article doesn't share the opinions of any mothers. Odds are, they agree with this view as well. Keep in mind, it was women who shot down the Equal Rights Amendment.