I've never thought of the 'giving away' thing to be about property. I've always seen at as a father relinquishing protection of his little girl to another man
So why can't a mother relinquish her protection of her baby boy to another woman? Just asking!
women do need to be protected by men. it's unbelievable that women think they can live alone. who else will guard the sanctity of her vagina if not her father or husband?
Jive Turkey said:Are you really going to twist that, Irvine?? Of all the benign things I've ever said...
Besides, I was talking about a father protecting his daughter... Isn't that part of their job?
I've never thought of the 'giving away' thing to be about property. I've always seen at as a father relinquishing protection of his little girl to another man
It's symbolic. I think it's sweet
Liesje said:I had my dad walk me down. I guess to me it just meant I was now and adult and that he was proud of me as a daughter (though I got married when I was 22, maybe it would have been more weird if I were older). I didn't really think of it as protection or property. If I'd told him we weren't doing it I'm sure he would have been disappointed, and I've never felt that my dad viewed me as his property or someone that he gets to protect or control.
And it maintains and reinforces the patriarchy.
But so do most weddings in general, from the virginal white cake to the symbolic getting of the first piece of her "cake."
Just ask this guy:
Waiting till the wedding night – getting married the right way | Fox News
to all thisanitram said:In the end, my fiance and I will walk in together, as is our preference, but my Dad walking me down on his own was never an option in my view. To each his own, though!
I'm honestly surprised nobody leapt on my earlier post that basically ridiculed the idea of staying a virgin until marriage. Clearly this forum needs more people like that Steven Crowder bloke to put me in my place.
I just figured since it's not the 1950s, it wasn't really something to be discussed
If someone wants to wait until they're married to have sex, that's totally fine. If someone doesn't want to wait, that's fine, too.
That's a very personal decision to make, and a person should make it because it's what they feel most comfortable doing, and not because others are telling them what to do. I will never, ever understand why people are so obsessed with what others choose to do in their own bedrooms. Why the hell is that any of your business? Why do you care?
Plus, to be perfectly honest, the people I've met who've made a big deal about waiting until marriage to have sex have generally (generally!) either had some serious judgemental and/or prudish issues about sexuality, or were struggling to come to terms with their own sexuality. I realise the latter sounds like I am implying closeted homosexuals, but I'm more thinking of people who like to portray themselves as pure and wholesome when they don't know how to handle a very sexual, kinky side of themselves.
The only person that I ever knew who took a purity vow/wore a ring (do people still do that?)
Plus, to be perfectly honest, the people I've met who've made a big deal about waiting until marriage to have sex have generally (generally!) either had some serious judgemental and/or prudish issues about sexuality, or were struggling to come to terms with their own sexuality. I realise the latter sounds like I am implying closeted homosexuals, but I'm more thinking of people who like to portray themselves as pure and wholesome when they don't know how to handle a very sexual, kinky side of themselves.
Pretty sure for the Bros Jonas -- like with Britney -a the virginity thing was all part of the brand.
The Jonas Brothers wore those rings. Russell Brand made fun of them at the VMAs some years ago, and I think Jordin Sparks has one too.
Because, you know, there's no in between. You're either a virgin or a slut.
I just fundamentally don't see what one has to do with the other, and I really don't see why anybody would deprive themselves of doing something pleasurable and fun until after they've had a specific ceremony and got a certain piece of paper. To me, it's like saying you won't eat ice cream until you've spent a whole summer living in a tropical country and have the passport stamps to prove it. Obviously it mattered more in times past, before the invention of effective, readily available, cheap birth control; if you could potentially have a child, being in a stable relationship obviously helped improve your chances of affording to raise said child. But now it only seems to be religious tradition that's keeping alive this connection between sex and marriage ... and that seems to be much stronger in the US than in Australia/New Zealand. I'd be a bit surprised if most people I know were in a relationship for a month and hadn't had sex.
Plus, to be perfectly honest, the people I've met who've made a big deal about waiting until marriage to have sex have generally (generally!) either had some serious judgemental and/or prudish issues about sexuality, or were struggling to come to terms with their own sexuality. I realise the latter sounds like I am implying closeted homosexuals, but I'm more thinking of people who like to portray themselves as pure and wholesome when they don't know how to handle a very sexual, kinky side of themselves.
However ...
This I completely agree with.
(I should say at this point that I completely understand people who only want to have sex if they are in a committed, long-term relationship. But these days, that is not a synonym for marriage. Hell, in both my family and my partner's, the only relationships that have lasted are those who haven't got married! )