The Price of "Purity"

Something has come to my attention that I find so creepy and disturbing that I feel I have to write about it. The Rangeline Neighborhood Community Development Corporation is holding a "Purity Ball" on June 25th. Here's the webpage: http://www.rangelinencdc.com/pages.asp?pageid=106170

Here's the mission: "To instill the principles in our teenage daughters on how important it is to protect their heart and body until she commits to a man on her wedding day. On this day, Fathers make a vow and promise to protect their daughters and guard their virginity. As the fathers are making these vows and promises, they present a purity ring (or other item) to their daughters. These daughters are then under their fathers guard and protection until they are married and replace their purity ring with a wedding ring. The daughters promise their fathers that they will stay pure until a man replaces the purity ring with a wedding wing. This ceremony will be symbolic of an actual wedding."


Okay, in addition to the grammatical errors in this statement (and there are many), this is just beyond creepy. I don't have a daughter, but I am a daughter and I know that parents have a hard time thinking of their children as sexual beings. Many struggle with the knowledge that their little darling is going to have sex someday. But this is the wrong way to go. Fathers who take seriously the exhortation to "protect their daughters and guard their virginity," are going to find themselves in a very uncomfortable situation.  With the average age of first marriage now in the mid to late 20's, that's a long time for fathers to be "guarding" their daughters' virginity. How exactly is a Dad supposed to determine whether his daughter is still a virgin? Fathers often have a hard time talking about sex with daughters anyway. Many fathers describe the discomfort they feel when their daughters begin to develop sexually. Some even worry they will become sexually attracted to their daughters.  For this and other reasons, most fathers leave "the talk" with their daughters to the mothers. If fathers are reluctant to discuss menstruation and the birds and bees with their daughters, how are they ever going to discuss their daughters' first sexual experiences? And wouldn't participating in a simulated wedding with his daughter feel really creepy to most men?


Someday many of these daughters will forget all about this "Purity Ball," or it will seem an unrealistic goal. Making young people take oaths of virginity at an early age is doomed to turn many of them into hypocrites or saddle them with a lifetime of shame and guilt if they don't live up to the expectation of "purity." And let's make it clear--95% of Americans have premarital sex. And purity pledges as a form of birth control are spectacularly ineffective. A recent study of teens who made a public pledge to abstain until marriage questioned the youth again six years after they made the pledge. Researchers found that over 60 percent had broken their vow to remain abstinent until marriage. The study also found that teens who took virginity pledges begin engaging in vaginal intercourse later than non-pledging teens, but that pledgers were more likely to engage in oral or anal sex than non-pledging virgin teens and less likely to use condoms once they become sexually active. The study found that pledgers were much less likely than non-pledgers to use contraception the first time they had sex. So, if this event is aimed at stemming the high teen pregnancy rate in the Frayser area, it may have just the opposite effect.


My other problem with this shindig is the fact that it's so expensive. It's $105 for the father and first daughter and $50 for each additional daughter. That's a lot of money for a family living in Frayser, one of Memphis's poorer suburbs. And what do they get for that? A "boutique" of flowers for the daughter, a "purity" band for the daughter (no doubt made of cheap base metal), a photograph of father and daughter and a "certificate of purity" for the daughter. I think any family would do better putting that money in the bank to fund the daughter's post-secondary education. 


And here's another thing: what about the many families headed by single women? Won't all this "father-daughter" stuff make girls whose fathers are not around feel different and inadequate? Yes, teens need parental support and they need to know they can say "no" to sex. But this kind of fear and guilt-based sex education that reinforces "traditional" gender roles and expectations (boys always want sex and girls need to tell them no), has not been proven to work and may be counter-productive. It's hard enough being a teenage girl without laying on all this purity and "accountability" crap on them. 

Reporting from LaLa Land...

If you've driven on Poplar Avenue near East Parkway any time in the past couple of months, you probably saw some people on the sidewalks holding signs. You may or may not have known why they were there. You may or may not have cared that they were there. But you should care, and I'll tell you why.

The protests are part of the biannual "40 Days for Life" protests at Planned Parenthood health centers around the country. They're schtick is "pray to end abortion." They are supposed to be praying and standing vigil. But recently they've become more aggressive--approaching and even yelling at people walking into the building. One of their leaders has posted a video blog post about it. You really should watch in order to hear what these "prayer warriors" think they are doing. The audio is crap, but that's on their end. Skip to 7:01 on the timeline to hear about the "sidewalk counseling" (harassment and trespassing) that they were doing on private property. (Which, by the way, is illegal.)



What is wrong with praying to end abortion? Like a lot of people, I fervently wish that there was no more need for abortion. I wish that women would never again get pregnant when they they don't want it or don't expect it. I wish that every pregnancy was a wanted pregnancy. I want every pregnant woman to get the best possible care during her pregnancy so that she carries to term and delivers a healthy baby. I wish every baby was born healthy and no family ever had to suffer the pain of stillbirth or infant death. If I were the praying type, I would even pray for these healthy and happy outcomes for our women and their families.

But praying outside of a woman's health center is a lot more than that. It is, in fact, an attempt to shame and intimidate women who seek care and the medical staff who serve them. It is sending the message: "You are doing something wrong and evil. You will suffer and go to Hell for it."

Jesus himself spoke out against public prayer. "But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly." -Matthew 6:6. He also said, "Judge not that ye be not judged." -Matthew 7:1. (I could go on and on. I went to Sunday school, too, you know!)

What would Jesus say about "40 Days for Life"? I honestly don't know. But I think he might ask these judgmental "sidewalk counselors," who drive Mercedes and pricey SUVs, when they are going to give up their worldly goods and follow him.

The State of Choice in Tennessee

Today is NARAL Pro-Choice America's "Blog for Choice" Day. The question asked of bloggers this year is: Given the anti-choice gains in the states and Congress, are you concerned about choice in 2011?  Here in Tennessee, a woman's right to access safe, legal abortion faces a very serious threat: proposed legislation to change Tennessee's Constitution so that women in our state are no longer guaranteed a right to abortion. The measure is called Senate Joint Resolution 127, known as SJR127.

You can read the language of the resolution here.  SJR127 is designed to circumvent a 2000 ruling by the Tennessee Supreme Court that found the Tennessee constitution provides even greater protection of women’s privacy rights regarding abortion than does the U.S. Constitution. SJR127 is an extreme measure that would take away rights and freedoms that Tennessee women currently take for granted. 

Worse yet, the language of the bill is deceptive. It implies that exceptions have been made for victims of rape and incest and for women whose lives are endangered by their pregnancies. However, the version of the bill passed by the General Assembly last session spells out no such exceptions.  If passed again by the Tennessee House and Senate by a two-thirds majority this session, SJR127 will go on the ballot in the general election in November 2014. If it is approved by a majority of voters who cast ballots in the Governor’s race, the measure will become law, allowing the Tennessee General Assembly to enact any number of unreasonable restrictions on abortion in Tennessee or even ban it outright if the Roe v. Wade decision is ever overturned.

SJR127 does nothing to increase access to contraception, prenatal care or childcare for Tennessee women or offer them any other options to make it easier for them to prevent unwanted pregnancies or carry unplanned pregnancies to term. It would allow government intrusion in the personal health care decisions of women and their families, putting bureaucrats in charge of a crucial life decision best left to a woman and her family in accordance with her own faith and personal beliefs. Women do not make the decision to have an abortion lightly, nor do they do it for frivolous reasons. 61% of women who have abortions already have at least one child, and 75% of abortion patients cite obligations to their existing children or other family members as the reason they chose abortion.

If the goal of policy-makers is to reduce the number of abortions in Tennessee, the best way is not by over-reaching government interference, but by reducing the number of unplanned pregnancies. We must provide accurate, complete, age appropriate sexuality education in our schools that encourages responsible behavior including abstinence, but also information about contraceptives. And we must take practical steps to increase access to birth control for all girls and women of child bearing age. Making contraception available and affordable reduces the number of unintended pregnancies and allows women to plan their families, while improving their health, the health of their children and their futures.

Everyone in Tennessee have a vested interest in preserving the right to access safe and legal abortion. If you believe that all people, both men and women, should be free to make personal, private health care decisions without the unnecessary intrusion of government bureaucrats, please ask your legislators to vote against SJR127.

Why Curry Todd Stands by What He Said

There's been a lot of outrage in the blogosphere by what state rep Curry Todd of Collierville said in a meeting of the Fiscal Review Committee in Nashville this week, and well there should be. Todd asked a state health official whether potential patients are asked to show proof of citizenship before receiving prenatal care. The official tried to explain to Todd that they are actually prohibited from asking for proof of citizenship by federal mandates. Todd then rather huffily said, "They can go out there like rats and multiply, then." You can watch the entire exchange here:

If Todd's concern is about what health care for indigent people is costing the state, he should be much more concerned about the health of native born Americans who are covered by TennCare. Care for TennCare patients who have chronic diseases caused by "lifestyle" factors costs the state many millions every year. In contrast, immigrants are relatively young and healthy compared to native-born Americans. Most have not lived here long enough to have become sickened by our toxic lifestyle. They don't require as much medical care, so covering them is fairly inexpensive.

Pregnant women can get "presumptive eligibility" coverage under TennCare to pay for prenatal care and labor and delivery. Would Todd prefer for them to get no prenatal care and deliver at home without medical assistance? That's very short-sighted, since the resultant child will almost certainly be covered under TennCare--because he/she is automatically a US citizen. It makes much more sense to make sure that child gets a healthy start in the world by providing adequate prenatal care for the mother than to have TennCare pay for much more expensive medical care for that child later.

My point is that Todd's outrage at people who come here and "breed like rats" is not based on fiscal concerns at all, because there's plenty of evidence that providing relatively inexpensive preventive care like "presumptive eligibility" for pregnant women actually saves the state money in the long run. If Todd had not shouted down that poor lady who was trying answer his questions, she could have told him that. But really, the whole point of the exercise was for him to look tough to his teabagger constituents, many of whom really do think of immigrants as "rats." They are just as pleased by Todd's outburst as we are horrified by it. So, I guess Todd can consider this "mission accomplished." It's so sad that this is what our great immigrant nation has come to.

Because It's Not Really About Saving the Little Baby Fetuses

The conservative Republicans who now control the Tennessee General Assembly like to brag about being pro-life--especially in an election year. Lt. Governor Ron Ramsey, who is running for Governor this year, is particularly emphatic about his "proven record of fighting to protect the unborn." (Lifted from Ramsey's own website: http://teamronramsey.com/issues).

Last year, Ramsey made a big show of threatening an independent government panel, the Tennessee Health Services and Development Agency, for approving Planned Parenthood Greater Memphis Region's application to move to a medical office building in Midtown Memphis that happens to be in the general vicinity of Memphis Catholic High School. When the deal fell through for other reasons, Ramsey was quick to issue a press release taking credit for blocking the move. Ramsey was also quick to take credit for legislation last year designed to "defund" Planned Parenthood by denying it a share of Tennessee's Title X federal family planning funding--legislation that was not entirely successful because there is literally no other agency in Shelby County qualified or willing to provide the full scope of family planning and related health services required by the Title X grant program.

But now the social conservatives show their true colors. As Speak to Power points out, one of the programs Republicans have elected to cut in this tough budget year is a $4.5 million program designed to reduce infant mortality in Tennessee. We know all about infant mortality here in Memphis. Memphis has more infant deaths than any other city in the United States, with a rate of 15 deaths for every 1,000 births.  It's an issue that has received extensive media attention here in Memphis and nationally. Infant mortality is both a personal tragedy for the families affected and a complicated public health issue with a myriad of contributing factors. After a flurry of embarrassing media coverage of the issue, state health officials came through with a number of programs designed to address the problem, the $4.5 million one among them, which also brought in a significant amount of federal matching funds to Tennessee.

So, if Ramsey is truly devoted to "protecting the unborn," as he says on his website, why would he not fight to keep this infant mortality reduction program instead of characterizing it as "pork"? Could it be because the bulk of the $4.5 program's efforts probably go to benefit the many poor and uninsured new and expectant mothers in Memphis and Shelby County? The disdain that religiously and politically conservative folks in Middle and East Tennessee have for Memphis and its "problems" is legendary. And you know what they're talking about when they say "problems." Yes, face it. Conservatives in the rest of Tennessee don't like it that Memphis is a majority black city that usually votes Democrats into office.

But it's more than that. Conservatives, for all their zeal for "life," don't approve of pregnancies that result from pre-marital sex. One reason they hate Planned Parenthood is that they think access to birth control makes it too easy for unmarried young people to enjoy sex, without suffering the consequences of an unplanned pregnancy. Their real goal is to force everyone to live by the same religious and moral strictures that they promote, but too often don't even live by themselves.

So, remember, when conservatives tout their pro-life family values, they're not talking about saving babies. Because if they really care about babies, why do they cut the health and social programs that benefit babies, children and families every chance they get?

Update: May 29, 2010

"Despite pleas by children's advocates and testimony that babies will die, Republicans on the state Senate Finance Committee stripped funding for an infant-death reduction initiative that officials say is reducing Memphis and Tennessee's high rates of infant mortality." From this morning's CA article. Yet more proof that conservatives only care about "unborn" babies. Once they're out of the womb, they're on their own!