Time Magazine - Only Two Years Behind Bloggers

Time magazine, presumably while perusing the archives of this and other blogs, came up with the startling realization that some fathers are having ceremonies where their daughters pledge their virginity to their fathers. As written about years ago here and elsewhere, EEEEEEEEEWWWWWWWW! (Followed by Clarification on Purity Balls.)

But Time manages to come up with a favorable spin on the practice, and the whole thing hangs on one crucial sentence that masterfully renders all common sense inapplicable - "Leave aside for a moment the critics who recoil at the symbols, the patriarchy, the very use of the term purity, with its shadow of stains and stigma." Leave aside the fact that a girl is being told her father owns her sexuality. Leave aside the disturbing symbolism of men holding "large swords" over kneeling girls. Leave aside the girl who felt "too dirty" to wear a purity ring because she was sexually assaulted.

You know, if you "leave aside for a moment" everything wrong about it, what cannot be made to seem okay? Severe gas pains? Genocide? Fathers creepily obsessed with their daughters' hymens?