I STILL remember the shock I felt, as a 12-year-old in the Seventies, when I discovered what the word "virgin" meant. As a good Catholic girl who had romantically toyed with the idea of giving my life to Christ at some stage (I soon got over that), I had been a great fan of the Virgin Mary. For some years I even had May-Day altars set up in my bedroom where I would pray to the beautiful Virgin, benevolent mother of us all.

When the priest at Mass talked about the need for "purity", I thought it meant not telling lies to your parents or beating up your little brother. I assumed the word "virgin" meant good or holy, or a combination of womanly virtues.

When I managed to join the dots and realised that it actually meant that Mary had not engaged in sexual activity, I was horrified.

The most important thing about this woman, whom I had been taught to idolise, was that she'd managed to produce a child without "dirtying" herself with something as base as sex? Even worse, the "sex" thing was so important that it was part of her title?

And I'd actually been complicit from the age of four or so in eulogising virginity as the female attribute, despite not having the faintest clue what it meant? Priests had discussed and agreed on this? My parents had known? As kids today might say: ugghh, gross.

As a teenager, I was always very wary of friends' parents who talked about sexual issues; virginity or otherwise. I had one friend whose father always wanted to discuss "what we got up to" with our boyfriends -- and, quite frankly, I found it more than a bit creepy.

Thankfully, my own father would probably have preferred to be slowly tortured and then burned alive than discuss my sex life -- or lack of it -- with me. Don't get me wrong, he took great interest in my various boyfriends, always remembering to say before he answered the phone: "Remind me again, if it's Eamon you're here, but if it's Jeff you're at your Grannie's and you won't be back until Sunday, is that right?"

And he always collected me half an hour before the disco ended, because he knew from experience that this was when all the action happened -- but he would have died a thousand deaths before he admitted his motive.

Instead, he would mutter about traffic and parking and such-like. In his own way, he protected me without making it too obvious what he was up to. I loved him for it. He -- and my mother -- taught me respect for sex and relationships by how they acted, not what they said.

Fathers have a huge impact on a daughter's future love and sex life. Studies show that girls who have positive loving relationships with a hands-on father have a later onset of puberty, and also engage in dating and sexual activity at a later age, to girls who don't have that experience. But there's a fine line between a healthy, loving relationship and one that borders on the sinister.

Last week, Times Online book editor Michael Moran was criticised for writing a piece with the title "I hope my daughter isn't a virgin when she marries". (My husband shared his sentiments.)

But more people than you may think believe that it is a father's duty to ensure that their beloved female offspring remain pure until marriage, and they weren't very happy at what they saw as Moran's encouragement of teenage pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases (despite the fact that, as many women don't marry until they hit 29 or 30, it would be a bit odd for them never to have experienced sex -- even once -- before marriage).

Last Thursday, Channel 4 showed a programme called The Virgin Daughters as part of its Cutting Edge series. It dealt with the increasing popularity of 'Purity Balls' in the US. Apparently, girls as young as six, dressed in white bride-like gowns, go to these balls accompanied by their tuxedoed fathers (mothers can attend if they so wish, but are incidental to the proceedings). A wedding-type ceremony takes place, the virgin daughter makes a vow to remain celibate until her father hands her 'gift of virginity' over to another male in marriage. The father swears to defend both her and the vow.

Approximately one in six girls in the US between 12 and 16 are estimated to have taken a 'purity' pledge.

I first became aware of this increasingly popular rite of passage last July, when journalist Nancy Gibbs from Time Magazine covered the Father-Daughter Purity Ball that took place in Colorado Springs. One of the daughters present, Kylie Miraldi, told Gibbs about a talk she had with her parents when she was 13.

"We discussed what it means to be a teenager in this world," she said. They then gave her a charm for her bracelet -- a lock in the shape of a heart. Her father has the key. "On my wedding day he'll give it to my husband," she explained.

Another father at this ball, Randy Wilson, explained to journalist Jane Treays (who was filming with Channel 4) what the essence of a woman's worth was: "There is a core question that women have in their being, and that is, 'Am I beautiful? Am I worthy of being pursued?'"

He went on: "It must be enforced by the father, the man in their life. If they do not get that reinforced by the father, they will go outside the home to get the answer to that question."

During the ceremony, the father declares: "I (daughter's name)'s father, choose before God to cover my daughter as her authority and protection in the areas of purity ... this covering will be used by God to influence generations to come."

A key kept by a father to be handed over to a husband? Women defining themselves are 'worthy of being pursued'? Wedding-type ceremonies between fathers and daughters with sex at the centre? Coverture?

Oh Lord, there's so much wrong with this on so many levels it's difficult to know where to start. (And that's without asking the obvious question of why only girls have to swear to remain pure.)

First, what century are we in? How many camels does the prospective bridegroom have to hand over before he takes control of his new piece of property? Will he require a bloody sheet as proof of the pudding?

As Eve Ensler wrote: "When you sign a pledge to your father to preserve your virginity, your sexuality is basically being taken away from you until you sign another contract, a marital one ... It makes you feel like you're the least important person in the whole equation. It makes you feel invisible."

Second, in case you were wondering, under the old system of coverture (covering), wives/daughters could not control their own property, file lawsuits, execute contracts or assert themselves as equals. It was a case of 'father owns daughter, husband owns wife'.

Third, this whole fatherly obsession with a daughter's virginity has creepily incestuous undertones. The idea that a father has power (ownership?) over his young daughter's sexuality can lead us into a very dark and dangerous place. It implies that girls of a very young age can have sexual appetites but need a man's guidance to know what to do with them. This is close to a paedophile's justification for having sex with minors.

Most responsible parents, while encouraging their offspring (of both sexes) to treat sex as the wonderful and special gift that it is, safely and in a loving relationship, will know that a daughter's worth is not based on whether her hymen is intact or not, and that a parent's job involves an awful lot more than ensuring they hand their daughter over to her prospective bridegroom virgo intacta.

Also, as the NY Times has reported: "Most teenagers who say they will remain abstinent, like those at the (purity) ball, end up having sex before marriage, and they are far less likely to use condoms than their peers."

Hmmm, Britney Spears, Whatsername Palin anybody?