Blog Archives
New Line of Tween Panties Promotes … Abstinence?
By Annie Shields @ Ms. Magazine Blog
What better way to reinforce family morals than by wearing underwear that doubles as a conversation starter, right? If the junior prom after-party starts to get dull, just take off your pants and encourage a dialogue! Awkward first date? Lift up your dress and ask for some feedback!
On the one hand, these panties were created by parents to encourage their teens to remain abstinent. On the other hand, these are panties. A strange choice of merchandise to hawk in the name of chastity.
Stranger still, these 75-percent “frisky” garments seem to be closely tied to a religious agenda. The very name of the line implies a Christian affiliation–subbing “your mother” for Jesus in the familiar WWJD. So what’s really going on here? Let’s take a closer look at some of the site’s offerings.
The essages on these panties–”Dream On,” “Zip It!” and “Not Tonight”–coyly indicate non-consent to a potential romantic partner. The marketing campaign confirms this:
But the whole concept of abstinence-promoting underwear makes about as much sense as commemorating sobriety with flasks instead of coins at AA meetings.
It isn’t just dumb, it’s dangerous. There’s nothing wrong with encouraging your children to choose abstinence before marriage; there is something wrong, however, with not empowering them with the knowledge and tools to make that choice and confidently communicate it to romantic partners. Without pulling down their pants.
What’s more, the panties can really muddy the notion of “consent” in young people’s minds. What if a teen girl wears “Not Tonight” panties and decides at some point in the evening that she actually does want to have sex? Nothing wrong with that, but the dissonance between the panty-message and her ultimate decision may well reinforce the mistaken idea that “no means yes” in her partner’s mind.
This bizarre line of undergarments calls to mind what Jessica Valenti dubbed The Purity Myth in her book of the same name. In an interview, she argues that oversexualization of women in the media and pop culture has begun to intersect with the conservative movement, resulting in the fetishization of virginity:
If you are telling young women over and over that what’s most important is their virginity … then you’re sending the message that it’s the body and sexuality that defines who they are … With the virginity movement it’s adults–and a lot of men–deciding what appropriate sexuality is for younger women. It’s anyone and everyone except young women themselves defining (their) sexuality.
This is ridiculously displayed in WWYMD’s promotional videos, which feature abstinence-friendly songs and wind-blown girls posing suggestively in their skivies next to fully-clothed young men. Here are some of the choice lyrics:
No kiss, no touch, no makin’ out hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey… When men see a body like this, they have a tendency to dismiss that I got anything upstairs, but I got me a lot of brains up there … Let me make it clear, so there’s no mistake my life’s goin’ good, there’s too much at stake to just hand it over, to any man…
The second video is even more explicit and confusing, combining gratuitous crotch shots with pro-chastity song lyrics:
I am waitin’, for my time in life, I am waitin’ for love. I am waitin’ on the world to change I am waitin’ on you
Abstinence-promoting strategies as ineffective as these will certainly prove to be are, unfortunately, not unprecedented. Just last week it was reported that the Candies Foundation paid Bristol Palin more than $260,000 to be a pro-abstinence spokesperson–seven times the amount they spent on actual teen pregnancy prevention programs. With the rise of what’s been called the chastity-industrial complex, peddling purity is big business. Once again, social and religious conservatives say one thing, do another and wait for the money to roll in.
ABOVE, TOP TO BOTTOM: Screenshot of Twitter message, WWYMD logo, Items from WWYMD line, Promotional flyer from the What Would Your Mother Do? Facebook page.
This was originally posted on the Ms. Magazine Blog on April 14, 2011. The above post was slightly edited, leaving out the intro on the piece’s relevence to the Ms. “Click!” blog carnival.
Popular Posts on BroadBlogs
Sex Objects Who Don’t Enjoy Sex
Women Want Casual Sex? Yes and No
Men Have Higher Sex Drive. Why?
Sex: From Casual Pleasures to Deep Connection. Readers Discuss
Below are comments on how women and men experience themselves, and how they think sex is best, based on earlier posts: “Are Women Naturally Monogamous?” and “Are Women Culturally Monogamous?” They’re edited for brevity and clarity. I’ve organized comments and added my own in italics. The comments typically revolve around the advantages of casual pleasures versus deep connection.
Polygamous women
- Divorced at age 33, I experienced a natural heightening of sexual interest and there were a number of men with whom I had sex during the next 7-8 years. I enjoyed it all tremendously and learned a lot about men and about myself. During that time, I met only one man I would have considered as a life partner. Now I realize that the relationship was great because the sex was great.
- If women were paid equally and had equal opportunity in the job market, I think that monogamy would be weakened. When I earned more than my husband, and could survive financially on my own, my sexual behavior changed as well.
- I seem to be different than the study (enjoying a variety of partners), but then so are most males I know (more monogamous).
Polygamous men
- Sex is so pleasurable. Why limit yourself from pleasure so long as everyone knows the ground rules – that this is about pleasure and not about commitment or love.
- Sex is magical. I would like to have sex with as many women as possible. But I always thought women experienced sex the same as I do. It hadn’t occurred to me that they might not.
Research suggests that women, on average, don’t enjoy sex as much as men do. U.S. women enjoy sex less than women in some cultures, but more than women in others. I’ll explore why later. The difference in enjoyment is not based on biology, but culture.
Jealousy and not loving equally
Women who are interested in polygamous sex can discover difficulties:
- As a lesbian I have a perspective that is completely woman oriented. I personally have had more than one lover at a time and found it difficult since I was always trying to explain why I was leaving to visit someone else. One always seems to love one more than the other.
Having sex because you’re expected to
- Here is my confession – two or three times I allowed myself to be picked up at a party or a bar. I am still so ashamed of those incidents. Remembering them makes me feel so dirty! I thought it was expected. You know – times were changing. Everybody did it. I now believe I let myself be used by men who were only after a little fun and had no serious intentions.
- I let myself be used by men who were only looking for fun… then I felt ashamed! Many women were brainwashed into believing they would enjoy it as much as men only to realize they were no more than a toilet bowl or conquest. I am sorry to disappoint but sex ain’t all it’s cracked up to be. Many may hide the shame and humiliation they feel by saying they liked it.
Women are punished for sex
Some women may feel pressured to have sex, but women are also punished when they have it, labeled “sluts”:
- The stigma attached to women likely keeps the number (of lovers they report) low
- (At least men) seem to have each others’ backs. Women don’t. They’re often quick to stab each other in the back.
Meeting social expectations: Men
- Men might be lying too since the cultural expectation for them seems to be quantity rather than quality.
- Men also have cultural expectations to live up to: amass notches on their belts.
- I wanted to have threesomes for the longest time. Then I realized it was largely about feeling left out of something I thought everyone else was doing.
Agreed. There are plenty of pressures on men, too. Women claim 5 lovers and men claim 12. Women must be underestimating and men exaggerating. The real number for both is likely in between: 8 or 9. Men also watch porn, think it’s an accurate portrayal of womens sexuality, and end up thinking they are missing out on a lot of action (that no one else is getting, either).
Meeting social expectations: Women and men
- I think you hit the nail on the head when you stated “Western women are much more monogamous than our Tahitian or American Indian sisters were before European contact.” I don’t think any of us are pre-wired to remain with one person all 80 plus years that we walk this earth. Man or woman. As humans we make that CHOICE to do so. What it comes down to is one having their own mind. Neither man nor woman should continue to be concerned with what current society dictates.
Women desiring depth, connection
- Women prefer depth, romance, quality in a relationship. They know that the closer one is in spirituality, emotions, the better the sex. Women need that depth to be fulfilled.
- A purely physical relationship requires little work. You don’t have to concern yourself with messy thoughts or feelings beyond the immediate moment. It’s shallow and one dimensional. Real relationship takes depth: looking at someone’s worth beyond pretty eyes, nice butt, and teeth.
- I have heard some women say they enjoy casual sex – but in 62 years I have heard far more say they haven’t enjoyed any sex let alone casual – meaningless sex. It’s intimacy we want! But I am still waiting for the rush of women who can honestly tell us about all the hot meaningless sex we have been missing! I’m all ears?
Men desiring depth, connection
A woman’s perspective
- I met both kinds of guys when I was dating. I met guys who seemed downright anxious to connect on a deeper level and guys who would lie in a NY minute if they thought it would get them into my pants faster.
A man’s perspective
- Our sexuality and the expression of it before and during (and after) marriage is, I am convinced, one of the more complicated aspects of what it means to be human. One could argue that God created men and women different sexually (in all the ways!) because to come together in meaningful intimacy (erotic or sexual) requires the development and expression of our deepest and highest virtues—sacrifice, humility, and kindness (even long-suffering at times!), and especially love. It is among the most meaningful and challenging dances we do.
And, don’t forget the men in men’s studies. Both Michael Kimmel and John Stoltenberg recommend men do sex from a place of love and commitment, and they say that is where they come from, themselves.
SOURCES: Comments from:
Blogs: BroadBlogs, BroadBlogs, and FreeMeNow
My Facebook site
Various lists responded either to the list, or to me via email
Student discussions
A version of this post was originally published August 23, 2010 as “Readers Discuss: Are Women Polygamous?”
My Son Likes Girl-Things. Is He Gay?
Random Moms across America think they know: My son has got to be gay. He wears khakis today but wore a dress to school from age 4 to 6; he used to do ballet and still doesn’t like sports; in preschool he was all about playing princess but now is all about Pokemon; and, in spite of the clear gender divisions in third grade, he plays with both girls and boys. I mean, what straight boy is into that kinda freaky gender mash-up?
This mom knows better, and she goes on to remark that, actually, butch boys can grow up to be gay, and fem boys can grow up to be straight.
Interestingly, few moms worry that their little tomboys will grow up to be lesbians.
But this mom gets LOADS of advice on how to turn her son “boyish.” Take away the girly toys and clothes, and enroll him in sports!
So much worry about girly boys.
Yet what we think of as “girl stuff” turns out to be “boy stuff” in other times and places.
Boys shouldn’t wear pink? Years ago the country staged a great debate on whether pink or blue should designate girls or boys. Some advocated pink for boys – such a robust color! Blue is so dainty.
The Cabbage Patch craze of the last generation led a lot of boys to want dolls. One of my little boy cousins got one for Christmas. Today most people would call him a manly man, complete with wife and baby. (And G.I. Joe is a doll, too.)

Ancient Roman men wore skirts, though the one on the left is armored! (A likely relief to some macho men out there.) Other Roman men wore dresses (robes).
And we mustn’t forget men in tights, circa “Romeo and Juliet.”
Moving on to the court of the “Sun King,” Louis XIV, we find him wearing lots of lace, ruffles, curls, and color. And gracefully posed!


The American founding fathers had considerably less glitz, but they still wore more color, lace, ruffles, and curls than most men today would be caught dead in. They also hired instructors to help present a more graceful appearance. One of my male students asked, “Ok, but what did the manly men wear?” This is what they wore!

In more modern times, Scottish men can still be partial to skirts, though they call them kilts. Below are traditional and more recent versions of the garment.
Judges, priests, and scholars also continue to wear “dresses” today.

Perhaps the most surprising expressions of manhood come from a culture entirely different from our own: the Wodaabe of Nigeria in Africa. There, men adorn themselves with makeup and jewelry. Because white eyes and teeth are part of the beauty ideal for men, they often roll their eyes and show their teeth to show off these features.

In our own time and place there’s Rod Stewart, who seems to be strongly hetero by all accounts. But check out these shots:
There’s a difference between sex and gender. Sex is biologically-based. It’s made up of our genes (xx for girls, xy for boys), hormones (testosterone, estrogen), anatomy (vagina, penis, breasts, etc.). But gender is all made up. Or what cultures make up to mark biological differences.
If clothing, makeup, jewelry and toys aren’t naturally “boy” or “girl” things, how can doing “boy” or “girl” things mark sexual orientation?
Popular Posts on BroadBlogs
Sex Objects Who Don’t Enjoy Sex
“Cock” vs “Down There”
Men Finding Fewer Women “Porn-Worthy”
Men: More Homophobic Than Women?




![MV5BODk1MTkzMTAyOV5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwMzQwMzEyMQ@@._V1._SY317_CR9,0,214,317_[1]](https://broadblogs.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/mv5bodk1mtkzmtayov5bml5banbnxkftztcwmzqwmzeymq-_v1-_sy317_cr90214317_1.jpg?w=202&h=300)







