Why do people scoff at "born-again" virgins?

[GEddie]

Quote:
Originally Posted by MBP007
Politically correct terms to me are sickening. I’d have less respect for someone who called themselves a “born again virgin” than someone who called themselves a “recovering slut”, the latter at least being honest, and not trying to hide their sins in some veil of righteousness.
Really, your sins are a matter between you and your Lord God, not something to be covertly confessed with some sweet-as-pie terms like “born again” or “virgin”. It’s almost as if you’re proud of the fact you sinned.
If you’ve done it, repented, and made yourself right with God, then the matter should be gone from your conversation. Period.

Just start a new thread on the same topic. No problemo.

ICXC NIKA

 

[DarkLight]

I’m trying to think of someone, among all the men I’ve known, who would give this a second thought, much less be critical of the woman. But there aren’t any I can remember.

Still, until canonization proceedings are started, I think one’s virginity is between you, God, and your intended spouse or religious order. A person who has a “past” should not have to apologize for defending chastity. If the common error can be eliminated, I mean that of attacking those who are not virgins but who have come value purity, I think the whole “secondary virginity” thing would be a moot point.

I unfortunately have known many men and women both who would not consider a woman who wasn’t a virgin eligible for marriage. It is sad, but in many more conservative circles a non-virgin woman may be little more than trash, no matter her current beliefs and actions. So perhaps I wonder if some of this isn’t an attempt by women to regain some of their value so a good man might actually look at them. Not the best way to go about it, but I don’t think all the blame rests on the women identifying this way.

 

[chevalier]

So I’ve noticed, mostly in the secular media but on CAF as well, a tendency to scoff at people who describe themselves as “born-again virgins” or “secondary virgins”. Meaning someone who has had premarital sex in the past but has repented of it and is now committed to chastity. Often, people use quotes or say “so-called born-again virgin”, in a way that seems to be mocking the term (I am not personally using the quotes for mockery purposes). Now, I can understand the secular attitude, that tends to think being any kind of virgin is silly, and certianly not something to aspire to, and finds it irrational for someone to give up such an enjoyable activity as sex.

But I’ve seen posts on CAF too where someone refers to himself or herself as a born-again virgin or secondary virgin and the response isn’t really that welcoming. Perhaps because this terminology, especially the “born-again” reference, is used more by evangelicals? Or perhaps people who are, I guess, “primary” virgins think their status is compromised if other people claim to be any kind of virgin when they’re not. Now, I can understand if people think this kind of terminology is silly and wouldn’t use it themselves, especially for a person who has been sexually active for years, had a child, etc. Personally I prefer the idea of chastity as a virtue to be practiced by everyone, whether single, religious, or married, but I’m not sure why people who choose to describe themselves this way seem to be scoffed at.

I do not scoff at the idea of an innocence restored, but as a bit of a purist in language with a general tendency to scoff at inelegant solutions, I do tend to dislike any unnecessary definitions at all, let alone ones that stand out in a natural sentence due to how artificial they are. Definitions here at the CAF are often used as weapons. Define a notion in whatever way you want, then proceed to steamroll the imaginary opposition having so defined the rules of the game. That gets tedious to watch after a while, as do some other crutches of the same kind (definitions aren’t the only one). It’s important to use normal, natural language.

Politically correct terms to me are sickening. I’d have less respect for someone who called themselves a “born again virgin” than someone who called themselves a “recovering slut”, the latter at least being honest, and not trying to hide their sins in some veil of righteousness.

Those who hear the term need the sensitivity to avoid dragging down whomever uses that term to describe himself. There is a reason the person chose to phrase it like that rather than a description more in line with what you suggested.

On the other hand, a term like that should not be used as an instrument of pressure and coercion: ‘affirm me as a virgin or else.’