Watched "The Purity Myth"

I got tossed a copy of this film and finally wound up watching it tonight. I wasn't quite sure what to expect - other than that I probably wouldn't agree too much with the conclusions it tried to draw. I thought it might draw attention to the history of infanticide in quite a few cultures around the world, yet didn't really find much if any of that. Just a lot of talk of the oppressive patriarchy.

By and large what still seems to be the crux of the issue is whether or not a blob of tissue growing in a uterus is human and worthy of protection. The whole issue seems to turn on that.

Some of the film's criticisms I'd agree with - there is a lot of hypersexualization of youth. I'm not sure that the point was particularly well argued though. I don't quite get how some of the activities - e.g. "purity balls" (which I've never come across a church organizing) - sexualize girls at a younger age. Having young girls not around their (biological) fathers on the other hand does have a measurable effect - think of the family structures that have become more prevalent in recent years as a consequence of the sexual revolution and advent of no fault divorce. I'm also not quite sure how Jessica's Valenti's film does anything to counteract this sexualization.

I would tend to agree with the film's argument that abstinence-only education and things like "purity pledges" haven't been all that successful in keeping people from engaging in sex outside marriage. Here's a blurb from a review of such programs:

Add Health data suggest that many teens who intend to be abstinent fail to do so, and that when abstainers do initiate intercourse, many fail to protect themselves by using contraception. Bearman and colleagues have examined the virginity pledge movement; they estimate that over 2.5 million adolescents have taken public “virginity pledges.” They found that pledgers were more likely to delay initiation of intercourse, 18 months on average for adolescents aged 12–18 years. However, those pledgers who failed at abstinence were less likely to use contraception after they did initiate sexual intercourse. At six-year follow-up, the prevalence of STIs (chlamydia, gonorrhea, trichomoniasis, and human papillomavirus [HPV]) was similar among those taking the abstinence pledge and nonpledgers. Although pledgers tended to marry earlier than non-pledgers, if married, most pledgers had vaginal intercourse before marriage (88%). Virtually all non-pledgers who had married had sex before marriage (99%).

I'm still not sure that "you'll probably fail" is a good argument for never trying to achieve a particular goal. You do need a plan for dealing with failure though.

One thing that I found a bit silly was that the film spends time talking about Lolita (which I wouldn't endorse) but then at another point mentioned horrifyingly the thought of The Vagina Monologues being shut down. Yet what do you find in the Vagina Monologues?

... the original performances of the play and the published book eulogize lesbian "rape" of a 13-year-old girl by a 24-year-old woman who plies her with alcohol. The pedophile section is entitled "The Little Coochi Snorcher That Could" — Coochi Snorcher being the nickname of the little girl's genitalia. Her vagina's tale of seduction begins, "She gently and slowly lays me out on the bed..."

After becoming more graphic, the little girl gratefully concludes, "I'll never need to rely on a man."

Both by statute and by feminist definition, the "seduction" scene is rape. Nevertheless, the Coochi Snorcher declares, "...if it was rape, it was a good rape." (source)

I'm also opposed to the US Violence against Women Act. Other than violations of basic civil liberties and that it ignores half the problem of domestic violence another good reason to oppose the act: some of the policies it suggests actually appear to increase the likelihood of women being killed by their partners. Of course that's just the start of the act's problems.