Purity Is Not Protection: A Christian Woman’s Case Against Shame

By Bronnie Hammond-Vale

I am a Christian woman, and I am tired of watching shame be sold to young people as protection.

If someone chooses to wait until marriage because of their faith, I respect that choice. If they believe sex belongs in a committed relationship because it is intimate and sacred, they are entitled to live by that belief. But a personal sexual ethic becomes something else when we teach a child that their worth depends on their virginity, or that they must carry the responsibility for someone else’s behaviour.

That is the purity culture I am talking about. It tells girls their bodies are temptations to be managed. It sometimes tells boys their desire is so powerful that girls must dress and behave to keep it under control. It promises safety through abstinence while leaving young people afraid to ask questions about consent, contraception or what to do when somebody pressures them.

Purity is not protection.

No person is “damaged goods”

Perhaps you have heard the old illustrations: a chewed piece of gum, a crumpled piece of paper, a flower with its petals pulled off. The lesson is supposed to be that sex changes a person’s value. Sometimes these metaphors are offered by adults who genuinely think they are helping young people wait.

But imagine hearing that lesson as a child who has been sexually assaulted. Imagine wondering whether something someone did to you has made you less worthy of love. Imagine being a teenager who needs help, but believes telling an adult will mean being judged first.

A human being is not a product that loses value when someone touches it. A survivor is not impure. Their worth was never up for negotiation.

Not every Christian church or family uses these messages. I know people of faith who approach sexuality with real care and compassion. But good intentions cannot make a harmful metaphor safe. We need to pay attention to what children hear, including the children whose experiences we do not know about.

The “body count” crowd is preaching its own version

You can see a secular version of the same double standard in parts of the online “alpha male” world. Some men demand to know a woman’s “body count” and rank her worth by the answer, while boasting about their own sexual history. Apparently his experience increases his status and hers diminishes it.

Someone can want a partner who shares their values about sex. That is a conversation about compatibility. Calling women “low value” is a conversation about contempt.

The language has changed, but the question underneath sounds familiar: Is this woman still good enough for a man to choose? Australia’s eSafety Commissioner describes manosphere content that treats dominance over women as a marker of male worth. Our Watch’s prevention framework explains why ideas about male control and women’s lesser value matter in the wider culture of violence prevention. That does not mean a man who asks about a partner’s past will commit violence. It means we should challenge the contempt and double standards rather than wave them away as jokes.

And please do not dress a rule that applies only to women up as “traditional values.” If it is acceptable for him and shameful for her, say plainly what standard you are enforcing.

Consent does not disappear at marriage

This should be uncontroversial: a wedding is not blanket consent. Neither spouse owes the other sex. A person can say no to somebody they love; they can change their mind; and the other person must stop. Guilt, threats, pressure and appeals to religious duty cannot make a choice freely given.

Some purity messages tell a girl to guard her body before marriage, then suggest her husband is entitled to it afterwards. At what point in that story does she learn that her own boundaries matter? Boys deserve better teaching, too. They are capable of hearing no, managing their own behaviour and respecting someone else’s autonomy. We should expect it of them.

When somebody uses faith or spiritual authority to frighten or control a partner, 1800RESPECT identifies this as spiritual abuse, which can be a form of domestic and family violence. I am not claiming that teaching abstinence causes abuse. I am saying that religious language should never be allowed to hide coercion.

Young people need more than a rule

You can teach your child your beliefs and still tell them how bodies work. You can hope they wait and still explain contraception. You can speak about the importance of commitment while teaching them to recognise manipulation and ask for help.

The World Health Organization’s review of sexuality education finds that well-implemented, age-appropriate education does not encourage earlier sexual activity. Programmes that address both delaying sex and contraception perform better on sexual health outcomes than abstinence-only programmes. In early childhood, this education concerns bodies, feelings, respect, boundaries and safety. It does not mean teaching small children to have sex.

The most useful thing a parent can say may be: “You can come to me, even if you have done something I would not have chosen for you.” A teenager should not have to choose between seeking help and keeping their family’s approval.

Faith should make us more careful with people

My faith calls me to love my neighbour. That includes the person whose choices differ from mine, the queer person who has been told they do not belong, and the survivor who needs to be heard without an interrogation about their sexual history.

If we believe people have inherent dignity, we cannot make that dignity conditional on a purity score. If we believe intimacy matters, consent matters. And if a child or adult tells us someone has hurt them, our first concern should be their safety, not protecting a church’s reputation.

I want Christian communities to ask a harder question than “Did we mean well?” Ask: “What did people learn from us? Could they say no? Could they ask questions? Would they come to us if something went wrong?”

Teach young people that waiting is a valid choice. Teach them that it does not make them superior to those who choose differently. Give them accurate information, clear language for consent, and a way to seek help without shame.

Purity is not protection. Knowledge, consent, compassion and accountability are part of protecting people.

If this brings up an experience of sexual, domestic or family violence in Australia, 1800RESPECT is available on 1800 737 732. If you are in immediate danger, call 000.