Talk:Purity ball

Criticism section

Added feminist critique of Purity Balls. --Chalyres 10:44, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Are there purity balls involving mothers and sons, or is it only for daughters? Some statistics on that subject might be insightful --Gargletheape 12:56, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

I have seen no evidence of mother-daughter purity balls and I doubt one could find one. As a culture, we place almost no value on male virginity and that includes both the main culture and the primary culture behind purity balls. - 67.166.136.32 (talk) 18:37, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Age range

12.160.185.126 recently added info about the girls' ages (though without sources):

Many of the girls who attend these events, some as young as age 4, many 10 -13, do not really have an understanding of what they are signing, and many of these children come from very insulated communities, even at 18 or 19 they may not have a real understanding of what their sexuality is, before they give it to their fathers.

It would be interesting to know what the typical age range for these events actually are, though the 4yrs claim is no doubt true as an exception. --Andrew Delong 23:25, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Use of word "cover"

Have any of the critics commented on the use of the word "cover", as in "the father promises to cover his daughter"? It is one of the farmyard euphemisms for "to have sex with", as in the ram tupping the ewe and the stallion covering the mare. It seems an odd choice, a word with an ancient sexual history, for such a pledge. BrainyBabe 10:12, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

The whole thing smacks of incest, but a source would be needed to add that criticism. Шизомби (talk) 13:31, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

external links

the Time and Post article don't match up to WP:ELYES. And also "Any site that does not provide a unique resource beyond what the article would contain if it became a Featured article." What unique resource do the articles contain? Much like the references these articles could be CITED for text in the article. Not for external links.

Furthermore, "Links in the "External links" section should be kept to a minimum. A lack of external links, or a small number of external links is not a reason to add external links." Lihaas (talk) 20:54, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

The Time photoset of a purity ball is a unique resource, in that this article does not contain photo evidence of the activities involved in these events. There are no fair-use or free photos of purity balls currently available. Whatever404 (talk) 20:34, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Reinstated NYT article. The article contains another photoset of a purity ball, also personal interviews, none of which are contained in the Time photoset or the article. Whatever404 (talk) 11:33, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

This is redundancy. In EL guidelines we don't need links for sake of it. And where possible a central link to various pictures in preferrable. Why one can also have an image gallery on wikipedia. The photo essay is there, for the article if need be one can always use it as a citation.

In other words, we don't need links for the sake of it. One of the links more than suffices. Why the indecision? Maybe the NYT is better as it has more? Lihaas (talk) 17:57, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

I disagree with your seeming fervor to rid this article of one of its two (2) external links. The New York Times and Time Magazine are well-known, respected US publications. Their reports each contain unique information and photographs, and add to this article, not detract from it. Whatever404 (talk) 12:16, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Unsourced content

The following content has been in place for a long time; I am moving it here. If it can be appropriately sourced, it can be moved back. However, the content of the pledge that the fathers make sounds as though it is specific to one particular purity ball, not universal to purity balls in general. If reinstated, it should be made clear as to the origin and use of this pledge.

What follows is the content. Whatever404 (talk) 11:40, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

The content

1 Fathers must sign the "Covenant of Purity and Protection," witnessed by their daughters, and openly commit to the pledge, a typical example of which might be:

I, (daughter’s name)'s father, choose before God to cover my daughter as her authority and protection in her area of purity. I will be pure in my own life as a man, husband and father. I will be a man of integrity and accountability as I lead, guide and pray over my daughter and as the high priest in my home. This covering will be used by God to influence generations to come.

2 Many individuals also criticize the fact that such balls take place between fathers and their daughters only, leaving out sons for whom it can be assumed chastity until marriage is not as important.

clean up

The article here (firstly doubtful for notability) is rather poor,. the criticism read largely like a book of quotations from specific editorials/writers, which in turn is almost an advert for them. The criticism needs to flow in a passage better with the sources listed in the end. No point rehashing old quotes simply to fill up space. Maybe the intro can be shorter and a 'background' section can follow. Lihaas (talk) 18:01, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

I don't have enough knowledge of PBs, at the moment, to help. I invited WikiProjects Christianity and Sexology and sexuality to help. Whatever404 (talk) 12:48, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

"the virgin daughters"

there is a doco by channel four on purity balls, full of references to make if anybody wishes to find some more. Mathmo ^Talk 09:39, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Dance culture category?

Is that a weird category or what? Yes, technically purity balls are a dance culture, but most people when they think of dance culture think of nightclubs rather than daddy-daughter purity evenings. Opinions? —Tom Morris 09:46, 9 January 2011 (UTC)