Island Wall Entertainment Unveils iHymen
Because the world is a very strange place, someone decided that the world needs a “purity ring” application for iPhone. Jessica Valenti says “I know I shouldn’t be surprised that there’s a iPhone “purity ring” application – after all, I’m all too familiar with the various ways virginity fetish reveals itself in American culture. But this still managed to skeeve me.” I will, however, cop to some level of surprise that this is actually a British application:
For just 59p, consumers can download an application that allows them to take a purity pledge and then display a silver ring on their phone to prove their commitment to abstinence. [...]
The company’s director, Henry Bennett, said: “We’re not charging for the idea. We’re just covering our costs. It’s all about reaching a new market. If you wanted to buy a purity ring, you could spend as much as £100.”
I suppose the fact that you could spend as much as £100 on a purity ring isn’t really any crazier than the underlying idea behind the purity ring. But still.
45 Responses to “Island Wall Entertainment Unveils iHymen”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
July 15th, 2009 at 11:36 am
Whenever I encounter the phenomenon of purity rings, I immediately think, “NuvaRing”.
July 15th, 2009 at 11:44 am
This application is biased against those of us who view sluttiness as moral and virtuous. I demand that Apple release an app that allows the user to pledge to remain slutty and display a photo of Paris Hilton on their phone.
(Incidentally, the Christian church might be eager to see an app that allows a married user to pledge their committment to endless procreation…)
July 15th, 2009 at 11:44 am
I don’t follow. Why is saying you won’t engage in intercourse until marriage crazy? It’s a valid choice to make.
July 15th, 2009 at 11:47 am
A purity ringtone would be even better.
But if you’re going to keep a purity ring on your phone, how does it get recharged?
July 15th, 2009 at 11:49 am
Unless you are wearing your iPhone on a lanyard around your neck exactly how does this work in practice?
He: “Honey its cold outside, can I just come in?”
She: “Read my iPhone screen and weep sucka!”
He: “Foiled again!”
Expecting a guy to peek at a woman’s hand or neck to see if she is sporting a wedding band or a crucifix/star of David before making a move is one thing, expecting him to power up your cell phone to examine your wallpaper is taking due diligence a step too far.
July 15th, 2009 at 11:50 am
But if you’re going to keep a purity ring on your phone, how does it get recharged?
…
All I know is that I’m bringing my new iHymen to the museum this weekend as I’m feeling lucky.
July 15th, 2009 at 11:54 am
Matt, there’re three very large communities in Britain that would be very much in favor of this.
-West Indians (along with the next group, practically the only consistent group of church-goers left in the UK)
-Africans (split between church and mosque)
-South Asians (mainly Muslim or Hindu, but as Hector here demonstrates, possessing a decent Anglican/Catholic minority)
July 15th, 2009 at 11:57 am
MNPundit, there are a lot of reasons why someone would choose not to be sexually active for a time (e.g., he/she is somewhat easily distracted, and would prefer to concentrate on education and career). But wearing one’s virginity as a badge of honor is fucked up, full stop.
July 15th, 2009 at 11:57 am
Matt, there was a smallish controversy here a couple of years ago when a girl was banned from wearing her “Silver Ring Thing” ring at school, as part of a general no jewellery policy. Of course, it turned out this wasn’t some unfortunate girl just trying to express her religious belief, but the daughter of two of the directors of the UK arm of the Silver Ring Thing ginning up a case to publicise the organisation. They lost the case and had to pay costs.
Basically, in the last 5-10 years there’s been a rather strange wave of evangelical organisations trying to import US revivalist ideas – from ID to purity balls – to the UK. I say strange, because numerically speaking the majority of evangelicals in the UK originate from western Africa, particularly Nigeria and Ghana. It’s just that these new American imports are much more media savvy and trying to proselytise to the white middle class.
July 15th, 2009 at 12:00 pm
Yes, it’s important that young British ladies be able to show their pasty paramours they will lose their virginity at around the same time as everyone else, but will be less likely to use birth control or condoms when they do.
July 15th, 2009 at 12:05 pm
So when you start having sex, can you buy a broken purity ring? Or maybe an iRod that breaks the iHymen?
OK, that got dirty.
July 15th, 2009 at 12:06 pm
Given low fixed costs and virtually no marginal costs, I suspect they’re doing slightly better than no earnings.
July 15th, 2009 at 12:07 pm
Valid perhaps, but inconsistent with most of our evolutionary development.
July 15th, 2009 at 12:09 pm
[...] (via) [...]
July 15th, 2009 at 12:18 pm
Now if the app would also sound a warning alarm if it detected too much fooling around, THAT would be worth spending some money on. Especially if it had an “I’m married now” setting that would replace the alarm with R. Kelly music.
July 15th, 2009 at 12:30 pm
“Valid perhaps, but inconsistent with most of our evolutionary development.”
True, but any number of socially useful things are inconsistent with evolutionary development.
As for the “craziness” of signaling…. Odd that I don’t see anyone here criticizing kids who signal other really strange things. The other day, I saw a kid wearing a GG Allin shirt. Which would seem to signal that this kid likes to drink huge buckets of urine, watch people poop on stage, and plan their own public suicide. I have sen other kids wear Che shirts, Ronald Reagan shirts, shirts that say, “Girls Poop.” In some cultures, teenagers use sharp metal objects to poke holes in various body parts, and festoon those holes with garish decorations! Not sure how that fits into the evolutionary scheme of things.
So maybe the purity ring kids aren’t REALLY the craziest people out there. Yet we somehow reserve special derision for them. Perhaps that says more about us than them.
July 15th, 2009 at 12:46 pm
There’s a far more effective way of showing one’s virginity … being a Beta male nerd in the blogosphere.
July 15th, 2009 at 12:47 pm
So maybe the purity ring kids aren’t REALLY the craziest people out there. Yet we somehow reserve special derision for them. Perhaps that says more about us than them.
There’s an inevitable ‘holier-than-thou’ sanctimonious aspect to it, especially due to the choice of the word ‘purity’: if you don’t act as I do, thou art Impure. That attitude richly merits special derision.
July 15th, 2009 at 12:52 pm
So maybe the purity ring kids aren’t REALLY the craziest people out there. Yet we somehow reserve special derision for them. Perhaps that says more about us than them.
They’re not the craziest people out there, no. But I personally dislike them because that kind of attitude and behavior often comes from growing up indoctrinated in fundamentalist churches and often under immense parental pressure. I know this from firsthand experience. Also, knowing the statistics that the people who wear purity stuff are no more likely to delay intercourse, far more likely to not use birth control or condoms when it inevitably happens, and more likely to engage in oral and anal sex as a way to “stay pure”, it’s very easy to deride them.
July 15th, 2009 at 12:56 pm
So maybe the purity ring kids aren’t REALLY the craziest people out there. Yet we somehow reserve special derision for them. Perhaps that says more about us than them.
1. Read about the father-daughter rituals at purity balls, ponder whether that is a model for healthy family relations and attitudes toward sexuality, and reconsider the purity ring thing. Whoever brought up evolutionary development was completely missing the point if he was being serious at all, but that doesn’t mean good criticisms of the purity movement don’t exist.
2. Who’s “we”?
3. People who wear memorabilia for GG Allin, Che, Reagan or other fictional characters are bizarre in their own ways, and were such people in the news now, no doubt some people here would be calling them weird, while others would be debating whether a meaningful political message is being made, and what it means that such people are most likely part of a subculture, an out-group. But they aren’t in the news now so it doesn’t really mean anything that we aren’t talking about them.
July 15th, 2009 at 12:57 pm
The “purity” title has some ugly consequences, to be sure, but is it really that much more antagonistic than a term like “healthy” when thrown around by the other side?
July 15th, 2009 at 1:03 pm
Well, I would argue that people who signal with GG Allin shirts were probably heavily influenced by some parental decisions, too. In fact, I bet that parental pressure plays a large role in creating people who worry that that reading Infinite Jest on a Kindle does not allow them PROVE that they are reading to people sitting next to them on a subway.
Similarly, I bet there are people who display Infinite Jest on their bookshelves DESPITE NEVER HAVING READ IT. And that there are kids who wear GG ALLIN Shirt without ever having imbibed a bucket of piss or planned their own public suicide. I know this might be hard to fathom, but I bet there are people who wear concert t-shirts without ever having actually seen the live show depicted thereon!
This, I am sure, is scandalous to those extremely interested in pure forms of authenticity. But to my mind, teenagers are teenagers and often do inauthentic things. For instance, I bet there are at least six or seven girls out there who display Paris Hilton garb (as mentioned above) but aren’t REALLY sluts. And I have heard rumors about teenage boys who actually lie about their sexual exploits.
But of course, no one takes them to task for being unduly influenced by slutty parents. n fact, nobody cares that they do this, for the most part. Because they are teenagers and we accept that they do silly things. Unless, of course, the silly thing is to say they don’t want to have sex before marriage. Because some of them will anyway. Haha! Craziness! These weirdos ought to lie abvout something worthwhile, like whether they have seen the Ramones in concert!
July 15th, 2009 at 1:07 pm
I agree with hum@18 and Adam@19. It is the sanctimonious and hypocritical aspect that burns me up. All it does is divide the girls into the ones with the rings and the ones without them. Both groups, most likely, are having sex anyway. Our daughters have enough pressure and angst in society. Some hollow ceremony or cheaply made ring isn’t going to change what sexual decisions she makes. Those will be based on her experience, upbringing, and choice. By the way, while there may be some programs out there, I have never in 30+ years of Southern Baptist Life ever seen an emphasis on boys maintaining their “purity” or having ceremonies. Just saying.
July 15th, 2009 at 1:19 pm
At least you can see things like t-shirts. What the hell are you supposed to do with an iPod app? Leave it on and wear it around your neck? If it at least had a social networking function so you could meet up with other people who are looking to not have sex, that’d be something of value.
July 15th, 2009 at 1:30 pm
There is a free alternative. Purity types could just add an “*” to everything, symbolizing their greater propensity for anal sex.
July 15th, 2009 at 1:44 pm
“But they aren’t in the news now so it doesn’t really mean anything that we aren’t talking about them.”
But we don’t have to wait arind for Che shirts to hit the news. A while back, unless I am mistaken, MY (rightly, I think) took a shot at the folks who get the vapors when they see a kid in a Che t-shirt. He went so far, I think, to suggest that some of the kids might even be engaged in irony, or some such. Although anecdotally, I seem to recall plenty of kids wearing said shirts in quite earnest fashion.
But regardless, who cares? Sure, the purity balls are creepy–if hilarously named. But I am sure some wear the rings and don’t go to the balls. Just like MY is sure that some wear the Che shirts ironically. Just like some kids wear DARE shirts earnestly, some ironically.
Either way, again, I see MY as being quite reasonable about the Che shirts. But engaging in his own version of the vapors when calling the purity ring signal “crazy.”
July 15th, 2009 at 1:49 pm
All it does is divide the girls into the ones with the rings and the ones without them
What I don’t understand is how they manage to reconcile “purity” as a highly valued commodity in female sexuality– to be bartered for marriage only, not mere earthly pleasure– with their insistence that it should be in greater supply, which would seemingly devalue the virgins they already are supplying for a narrow marriage market.
July 15th, 2009 at 1:49 pm
Sam M,
You seem to be getting more unhinged by the post. Does this movement have some personal meaning to you?
You seem to be ignoring most of the points made in this thread, however. Let me try to summarize them for you:
1. Teenagers do a lot of dumb things. If this were a post about some other dumb thing, perhaps one of the ones you mentioned, we’d be making fun of that instead. We make fun of a lot of dumb stuff here.
2. Purity stuff is really easy to make fun of because of how blatantly hypocritical it is. They’re generally not having any less sex and it’s generally much less safer.
3. It’s particularly subject to derision because of the culture that leads to it. The more religious states (ie southern) have noticably higher teen pregnancy rates, in large part because of the culture of abstinence-only education, an insistence that teenagers just won’t have sex if you tell them not to, prohibitions on birth control because that might lead to sex, etc. It’s idiotic and it has a lot of bad consequences. So when I see someone with a purity ring, I see someone who’s probably been intentionally given a poor sex education and who’s more likely to become pregnant. That’s pretty easy to mock.
July 15th, 2009 at 2:05 pm
But regardless, who cares? Sure, the purity balls are creepy–if hilarously named. But I am sure some wear the rings and don’t go to the balls. Just like MY is sure that some wear the Che shirts ironically. Just like some kids wear DARE shirts earnestly, some ironically.
Either way, again, I see MY as being quite reasonable about the Che shirts. But engaging in his own version of the vapors when calling the purity ring signal “crazy.”
If equality of the sexes existed I’d agree, but I think what’s lurking behind it is that old monotheistic patriarchy (seen in Iran, Saudi Arabia, etc also) where the point is to keep women in the back seat or kitchen, the devil is Gay, and pleasure is sinful and virginity is holy.
However as some people have pointed out may be it’s just someone trying to make a buck, like the episode on South Park when Cartman starts a Christian Rock band to make some money, which he does.
July 15th, 2009 at 2:29 pm
“You seem to be getting more unhinged by the post. Does this movement have some personal meaning to you?”
None whatsoever. As for unhinged, not quite sure what you mean. All I am doing is pointing out that when evangelical christian kids do something weird and creepy, the message here is, “They’re crazy.”
But when the other side of the aisle says, “Kids these days!” the message seems to be that kids are kids, and will remain kids, and we ought to relax.
I think the latter message is the correct one, and ought to be applied across the board. Because people here sound just as ridiculous complaining about purity rings as Glenn Beck or whoever complaining about Che shirts.
But that’s fine. If you want to poke fun at kids who promise to remain virginal, but end up screwing like jackrabbits, that’s cool too. I guess it’s kind of funny. Because it’s hilarious to point out someone else’s hypocrisy. Right? So that’s all I’m doing. Of course, it’s less funny to the hypocrite in question, I suppose.
July 15th, 2009 at 3:01 pm
All I am doing is pointing out that when evangelical christian kids do something weird and creepy, the message here is, “They’re crazy.”
But when the other side of the aisle says, “Kids these days!” the message seems to be that kids are kids, and will remain kids, and we ought to relax.
No, I don’t agree with this. Evangelical kids doing their stuff isn’t just “kids being kids”. It’s not something only a certain age group does that they grow out of, though some of them thankfully do grow out of it. A lot more stay fundamentalist evangelicals their whole lives and have kids (lots of them!) who they indoctrinate with the same stuff. Which wouldn’t be that bad except that they all mindlessly vote Republican because that’s what their preachers tell them to do, which hurts the country.
I mean, sure, we can stick to calling it weird and creepy instead of crazy if that’d make you feel better. But stuff like father-daughter purity balls are on a whooooole different level from any other teenage trend you’ve mentioned, and it bothers a lot of us for reasons that other stuff doesn’t. I don’t think it’s unjustified to feel that way.
July 15th, 2009 at 3:09 pm
But when the other side of the aisle says, “Kids these days!” the message seems to be that kids are kids, and will remain kids, and we ought to relax.
I think the latter message is the correct one, and ought to be applied across the board.
The purity thing isn’t “kids being kids.” It’s adults indoctrinating kids into their own creepy repressive issues-laden bag of hangups.
July 15th, 2009 at 3:17 pm
I lost my purity ring in a hooker.
July 15th, 2009 at 3:19 pm
Sam M,
It’s not the fact that some wish to remain virgins, that causes eyebrows to raise. Hey, more power to them. It is the outward and holier than thou attitude that I have seen personally (sadly in my church and other churches) that these rings and ceremonies create. In my former church (I’m still a recovering Southern Baptist), my daughter said she did not care to participate in the True Love Waits program. I said fine. Then I had a couple of deacons and other parents try to make me feel guilty about not forcing her to do it. The other “ring” girls treated my daughter poorly because she was not in the clique. Both my daughter and I told them in the most Christian way- to STFU. A few months later, a family of holier-than-thous left the church because their daughter became pregnant out of wedlock. Sad, they just could not face their “brothers and sisters in Christ” after being such blowhards about the subject.
Maybe I’m just the private type- some story about praying in public v. private comes to mind- but if my daughter wishes to remain a virgin that is her choice but she doesn’t need to trumpet it to the rest of her Youth Sunday School class anymore than if she made it with the captain of the football team. That’s between her and God. As a Dad, I can set limits, raise her in the way I hope and think is right but ultimately it’s going to be her decision.
July 15th, 2009 at 3:44 pm
If all this stuff had been going on when I was a teenager, I would have bought into it 100%, I would have worn a purity ring and taken the chastity pledge and joined a chastity club and participated in meetings with great enthusiasm. Talking and thinking about virginity and chastity is talking about sex, it’s like sitting in a room, not thinking about an elephant.
I would have loved to have been in a group, probably overweighted with girls, all talking about remaining pure, and abstaining from sex, and saving yourself until marriage, and the various strategies you use to overcome temptation, and recovering if you stumble. If you can’t get something going in a group like that, you’re dead. The abstinence people talk about secondary virginity, I would have practiced secondary, tertiary, quaternary virginity, whatever it took.
If you want young people to abstain from sex, quit talking about sex all the time, talk about making wise life choices. If you say stuff that makes some kind of sense, and you treat people with respect, the ones who are inclined to listen to you will listen. If you make sound arguments, you can influence people. If you make some kind of sense when you talk to people, you can cut down on the amount of premature sex, and that’s about all you can hope for, all this talking about abstinence all the time will get you exactly nowhere.
I swear to God, I don’t know if some of this stuff is really real, or if it’s just a way to get faith-based government handouts.
July 15th, 2009 at 4:25 pm
Increasingly, we are finding that this isn’t true.
Or perhaps these rings are as meaningless as Che t-shirts. Certainly, the evidence suggests that they are.
July 15th, 2009 at 4:35 pm
SamM,
This is a money-making venture seeking to capitalize on the human penchant for religiosity (which too may have conferred certain evolutionary benefits).
The Che kids are no more likely to start a revolution than the Purity kids are to keep their virginity. (They may maintain their vaginal virginity, but human sexuality has many dimensions.) On the other hand, the tee-shirt kiosks in the Lower East Side don’t attempt to disguise their profit-making motives.
July 15th, 2009 at 4:37 pm
Does anyone know if Bristol Palin worn a purity ring?
July 15th, 2009 at 4:40 pm
It broke.
So did her mom’s.
July 15th, 2009 at 4:43 pm
Thanks, Levi, and forgive the typo. BTW, you’re a hottie.
July 15th, 2009 at 4:48 pm
Isn’t vanity one of the deadly sins? Did I miss something?
July 15th, 2009 at 9:00 pm
For those who have itunes, here is a link to the Purity Ring app.
The second screenshot is hilarious. I kinda want to buy it just to see what happens when you “reject” your purity pledge.
July 15th, 2009 at 9:02 pm
Oh one more hilarious thing- look at the key words used in the app description:
Purity, ring, Pledge, Religion, Chastity, Jonas Brothers, Miley Cyrus, Bible, God, Jesus, Sex, Naked, Woman, Pocket……
July 16th, 2009 at 12:21 am
Since it’s British maybe it’s something Sacha Baron Cohen is cooking up for his next movie.
July 16th, 2009 at 3:40 am
Not really. Pat sociobiological “findings” in the newspapers are generally off the back of highly speculative research. It may be that it isn’t true, but we’re a long way off knowing that yet just because some jerk in a psychology faculty put out a press release saying it’s hard-wired for boys to prefer blue over pink.
In any case, many species practice monogamy. The purity pledge isn’t an oath of life-long chastity.
The arguments against this stuff are that it’s creepy and daft and worryingly patriarchal and wholly ineffectual, not that it somehow isn’t selected for biological fitness.