Feminists Offended by Abstinence

This is a long post - but this stuff really gets to me . . .

Today Yahoo had an article about a secular abstinence group at Harvard University. I was shocked to read that some feminists were upset by the line "You're worth waiting for" because it's a "relic" that values purity! To read an intelligent conversation about the value of modesty and purity to the WOMAN I encourage you to read A Return to Modesty by Wendy Shalit (I haven't read the whole thing but everyone who has says it's great). Let's just say one of her main arguments involves free milk.

The mindset discussed in this article has been around for at least a decade. My husband had a friend, who, as a freshman at a California college, attended a seminar similar to the one mentioned in the article. I think the story goes that at one point the presenter shared about safe sex methods available to these verile, freshman boys. At the end of the conversation my husbands' friend asked why the presenter didn't share about the sure-fire safe sex measure - abstienence. The presenter was a little taken aback at the suggestion that this would be an option.

Things like this really get me riled up. For health reasons alone (now that Texas is all but requiring young girls to have the HPV vaccine) one should think twice before having sex. Let me digress for a moment to discuss the HPV vaccine issue. This is the disease that can lead to cervical cancer that is VERY prevalent in young people. However, it is a sexually transmitted disease - that is the ONLY way to get it. I understand wanting to stop an epidemic problem (or is it endemic) - but legislators telling my 11 year old that we know they'll probably have sex so they need this shot - that's a little much for me. Having the parental option - of course; requiring it at such a young age - I don't think so.

Okay, back to the "wise" feminists at Harvard. In the midst of all the conversation about rights over your own body, the biology of sex, etc., one thing is rarely mentioned - the heart. This is the part that gets me - women are told to be callous and free. Sex was created as an expression of intimacy and it can't be divorced from that without ripping at your emotions, relationships and your soul. I think that we need to recognize ALL the implications of premarital sex and prepare our young girls with the full picture - sex isn't just biology - it's also psychology - especially for them. This is not because we are the "weaker" sex it is because (as science continues to show us in all other arenas) body, spirit and mind are entertwined on so many levels. So you can have "safe sex" biologically, but it's almost impossible to do this emotionally.

The other thing that irritates me is that in two generations science and society have colluded to overturn long held propriety and morality. So that now, if you choose to be pure you are a "relic". Putting aside the moral and religious implications, if you choose to be free of disease, if you choose to ensure your children have a two parents (as much as you can anyway), if you choose not to do damage to your own body or emotions - somehow you are a non-thinking being blindly following tradition and outdated paternal social patterns. College students are adults (except when their mommy's show up to try to bail them out because they broke multiple dorm regulations), so they can make choices about their own body and how they'll use it - I agree with that. But today, it is almost countercultural to choose ancient wisdom over recently found "truths" that encourage you to do things just because you can.
Colleges are supposed to be places of academic discussion, varied opinions and open minds. So, my final issue is that according to the article 29%, admittedly a minority of college students, choose to abstain. If this were ANY OTHER (liberal) ISSUE everyone would be supporting the right of the minority to speak and share their views. But because it does not coincide with a liberal thought pattern (which according to the article seems to support the free speech of a student run porn magazine) - it must be belittled and touted as backwards, fuddy duddy and unintelligent. Props to the student paper columnist who didn't fall into this common trap.

So I just want to say that I support this "relic" behavior that a minority choose to follow.