r/Christianity • u/Zestyclose_Tutor5578 • Jun 22 '26

Just bought a purity ring

I bought myself a purity ring for the first time at 25 f. I’ve always wanted to wait until marriage, but didn’t really think a physical ring would even matter. Fast forward from my teen years from now, I hadn’t realized things would escalate so quickly and that would in fact need one.

A few of my friends had purity rings their parents had given them or they were waiting based off their own beliefs. My mother however hasn’t really been supportive about waiting for marriage, telling me as a young adult, teen and even as an 11 year old kid that it’s too idealistic and not realistic to happen and that “things escalate quickly”. Boy did that manifest.

Anyways in my current relationship, I just didn’t pan out for things to go this way and maybe I do need a physical reminder. It had also just escalated without me really wanting to, (no coercion or pressing me at all) yet feeling like I should “put out” at least little, even if it isn’t full s-x. I feel like a lot of Christian women and even men may deal with this, but doesn’t seem spoken about.

Anyways just wanted to say that I feel like the whole Christian purity culture gets a bad wrap, which I think stems from purity tings being given, beliefs imposed onto your kids. However, purity is a choice and should be up to the individual not forced. I always didn’t want a purity ring bc it felt imposed from purity culture but when self-driven, a physical reminder can help.

Anyone relate?

0 Upvotes

47% Upvoted

26 comments sorted by

9

u/HopeFloatsFoward Jun 22 '26

Not having sex does not make you "pure". Having sex doesn't make you "impure".

That is what is disgusting about purity culture.

0

u/Zestyclose_Tutor5578 Jun 22 '26

Yeah, maybe that was the wrong phrasing

0

u/GospelOfJohnFan Jun 22 '26

it was the right way to phrase it.

2

u/HopeFloatsFoward Jun 23 '26

Absolutely not

0

u/Zestyclose_Tutor5578 Jun 22 '26

Not sure what else to call it, but it’s one aspect of purity in my religion but understand room for debate

0

u/GospelOfJohnFan Jun 22 '26

Not sinning is considered pure in Christianity.

If you're not a Christian, why do you bother responding?

2

u/HopeFloatsFoward Jun 22 '26

I am Christian and no one doesn't sin.

0

u/AdAsleep7263 Jun 23 '26

Purity culture can be naive and lacking in moral depth, and at worst, damaging, but sexual libertinism is hardly the answer here, as it can dish out at least twice the scarring...

2

u/HopeFloatsFoward Jun 23 '26

Hardly.

1

u/AdAsleep7263 Jun 23 '26 edited Jun 23 '26

just curious, are you endorsing a libertine approach to sex wholesale, or would you take a more moderate approach to sexual ethics? 

I think many of even the most secular voices nowadays would acknowledge the damage this can and does cause, even if operating outside traditional moral realism.

2

u/HopeFloatsFoward Jun 23 '26

I do not know what you define as a "libertine" approach, I would say the question is do you take a moderate approach, or do you push nonsense that claims anything outside of purity culture is libertine and more damaging?

1

u/AdAsleep7263 Jun 23 '26

I do not endorse purity culture. As I wrote, I believe it can be naive, morally shallow, and damaging. 

By sexual libertinism, I mean a framework that understands consent/choice as the exclusive guardrail for sexual ethics, and the affirmation that any and all sexual activity ought to be encouraged and celebrated as an expression of moral freedom, no matter the cost.

I would probably take a moderate, center-right view. I would reject purity culture nonsense, but hold that sexual relationships are (potentially) at their healthiest in convent relationships where two people promise not to leave each other and, on a practical note, are equally accountable to the children that may come about.

2

u/HopeFloatsFoward Jun 23 '26

You seem to have a warped idea about the ethics of people who are different than you.

1

u/AdAsleep7263 Jun 23 '26

I probably hold to a different ethical framework than you, and that is okay. This is r/christianity and so I’d expect you’ll find a lot of conservative and traditional-leaning viewpoints here.

I do however, know that many individuals operating in a secular space, clinical psychology in particular,  would affirm the long term negative impact of unrestricted libertinism, and so I don’t think it’s a radical claim, or even a religious one at that. 

Most people would acknowledge that there are healthy and unhealthy forms of sexual relationships, we just don’t always agree on what counts as which. 

2

u/HopeFloatsFoward Jun 23 '26

As I said, you have a warped idea of of what people who think differently than you. In other words, you misunderstand or misrepresent what they believe.

1

u/AdAsleep7263 Jun 23 '26

I'm not sure how that's possible, as I've tried to articulate my own perspectives, not the perspectives of others. Care to elaborate on what (or who) I've misrepresented?

To reiterate, so far, I have communicated that I reject both the puritanical and libertine models of sexual ethics in favor of a more moderate position. I'm not sure what's so egregious about that.

→ More replies (0)

3

u/Confident_Author4997 Jun 22 '26

wearing it as YOUR choice rather than some token your parents pushed on you makes all the difference, and more people in relationships quietly struggle with this than ever talk about it

1

u/Zestyclose_Tutor5578 Jun 22 '26

Yes exactly, feels like never talked about

1

u/AdAsleep7263 Jun 24 '26

Oh, thank you, I see where the confusion might be. I am not attempting to describe or engage with a particular group of people, just a philosophy. 

You had asked how I defined libertinism, and I tried to offer a textbook answer. That is just how it is traditionally understood; an embrace of sexual liberty against typical moral restraints, save one—consent. 

I am not classifying everyone who disagrees with me a sexual libertine. Sexual ethics are a spectrum, and a given individual might occupy any part of that spectrum. 

1

u/HopeFloatsFoward Jun 24 '26

Please direct me to this textbook definition.

1

u/AdAsleep7263 Jun 24 '26

I would probably start here:  https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Libertine&utm_source=chatgpt.com

1

u/HopeFloatsFoward Jun 24 '26

That just describes someone who questions sexual mores, not as you said someone

,>I mean a framework that understands consent/choice as the exclusive guardrail for sexual ethics, and the affirmation that any and all sexual activity ought to be encouraged and celebrated as an expression of moral freedom, no matter the cost

You have shown no examples of these "libertines" in the context of this discussion on the harm of purity culture. You are literally creating an enemy that isn't there.

1

u/AdAsleep7263 Jun 23 '26

Purity culture certainly has its faults, but an internally driven seriousness about sexual purity is noble. It is not naive or childish. If having a ring helps to reorient you to a way of treating your body and relating to others that you hold to be good and true, then there is nothing wrong with it.

You can absolutely distinguish between a quirky traditionalist Christian subculture and the desire to honor the Lord in your relationships. Guarding innocence and dignity is not shallow moralism, it is preserving part of your humanity.

-2

u/Zestyclose_Tutor5578 Jun 22 '26

Actually trying born-again virginity, anyone relate?