Skip to content
0
  • Home
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
  • Home
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (Sketchy)
  • No Skin
Collapse

Wandering Adventure Party

  1. Home
  2. Uncategorized
  3. So, in my circles, the phrase "purity culture" refers to the harmful & abusive attitudes & behavior around sex & sexuality in religious communities (especially within evangelicalism).

So, in my circles, the phrase "purity culture" refers to the harmful & abusive attitudes & behavior around sex & sexuality in religious communities (especially within evangelicalism).

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Uncategorized
69 Posts 32 Posters 0 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • Ruth [☕️ 👩🏻‍💻📚✍🏻🧵🪡🍵]P Ruth [☕️ 👩🏻‍💻📚✍🏻🧵🪡🍵]

    @artemis as someone else raised in purity culture -- you've emphatically expressed my thoughts.

    As far as I can tell, the people using it are people who gawped at us from the outside. And given our current religious nationalist situation this is not a historical notion.

    F This user is from outside of this forum
    F This user is from outside of this forum
    Freekie
    wrote last edited by
    #37

    @platypus @artemis

    Hi,

    First of all, albeit that I can only imagine your trauma, you have my compassion.

    As for the 'hijacking' of your term, imho we may be dealing with a tradition of suppression that goes back far before the inquisition.
    Pope Franciscus tried to address misconducts in the church and even he was not able to change it. I believe we can and it starts with acceptance and compassion with our fellow beings in their dwellings. They don't know better, but they will, in their time.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • ArtemisA Artemis

      It's really frustrating having a term people like me use to describe the trauma that shaped us picked up & used in some vague & non-specific way for no particular reason.

      If you Google the term, you'll see references to the meaning I am using. People can come up with another term for their annoyance at people who have opinions about what they should or shouldn't do.

      Don't steal terms from trauma survivors. We're using those.

      Christian Kent   𝘊𝘒 :\﹥W This user is from outside of this forum
      Christian Kent   𝘊𝘒 :\﹥W This user is from outside of this forum
      Christian Kent   𝘊𝘒 :\﹥
      wrote last edited by
      #38

      @artemis It happened to “fake news”, it can happen to you 😅 but that’s fine, fight back with “Sexual Purity Culture”, then drop the “sexual” like a shortened honorific after a discussion begins.

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • ArtemisA Artemis

        I don't try to be a language purist who insists words & phrases can only ever be used in certain ways, but...sometimes we have come up with useful terms for things we really need to be able to discuss & think through & it's just not *helpful* to have them hijacked for non-specific purposes where *any number of other words* could be used instead.

        Christian Kent   𝘊𝘒 :\﹥W This user is from outside of this forum
        Christian Kent   𝘊𝘒 :\﹥W This user is from outside of this forum
        Christian Kent   𝘊𝘒 :\﹥
        wrote last edited by
        #39

        @artemis yep it’s not helpful

        but that’s because it’s part of Distraction + Delusion + Despair

        Stay on point, stay engaged with your audience

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • ArtemisA Artemis

          Purity culture created a lot of the worst aspects of my religious trauma. MY WHOLE LIFE was purity culture. Everything I did, every interaction I had before my mid 20s was shaped by it.

          Would it be so bad to just let us survivors of religious trauma use a combination of words which really didn't get used much at all for anything before we coined it & started using it? Nobody was using it for much, we started using it & now apparently it's a popular term for something almost completely separate.

          Christian Kent   𝘊𝘒 :\﹥W This user is from outside of this forum
          Christian Kent   𝘊𝘒 :\﹥W This user is from outside of this forum
          Christian Kent   𝘊𝘒 :\﹥
          wrote last edited by
          #40

          @artemis *nods vigorously*

          Taking your label is not a different war; it’s the same war.

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • ArtemisA Artemis

            I don't try to be a language purist who insists words & phrases can only ever be used in certain ways, but...sometimes we have come up with useful terms for things we really need to be able to discuss & think through & it's just not *helpful* to have them hijacked for non-specific purposes where *any number of other words* could be used instead.

            s0 Unbreaks StuffS This user is from outside of this forum
            s0 Unbreaks StuffS This user is from outside of this forum
            s0 Unbreaks Stuff
            wrote last edited by
            #41

            @artemis surely we had agreed “virtue signalling”/“virtue policing” was the term for what he’s describing? We’ve been using it that way for years, whether or not one agrees with particular accusations.

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • FoolishOwlF FoolishOwl

              @artemis I've seen "purity culture" used a lot within the ostensible left to denounce critics and criticism. It was a big part of the "dirtbag left" who were a major influence on DSA around 2014-2015 (some of whom went outright fascist).

              I think it did start as a deliberate comparison of critics of internalized sexism, racism, etc., to Purtians and evangelical Christians.

              It was used to bury a lot of important critiques on both sides of that comparison.

              CyC This user is from outside of this forum
              CyC This user is from outside of this forum
              Cy
              wrote last edited by
              #42
              Purity is bad regardless of who does it. It's bad because it enables sexual oppression, and literal oppression, and persecution of minorities, and homogenization of diversity. The same diversity keeping us from all simultaneously dying of the same virus. It's bad when people rely on purity to halt progress, because it goes beyond stopping people from doing bad things. It's bad when people rely on purity to further progress (you only get to argue with me if you are a Rationalist). Purity just... sucks. We want good things, not purity, and purity culture distorts reality until people are throwing away good things because they are labeled "disposable."

              So please do talk about fascism, and the role Christianity (and also Mormonism) plays in forcing it on modern society. Please talk about the assholes claiming some Christ fellow said they get to murder trannies for not being pure enough. Please expose all the abuses of church authority that seem to disproportionately happen to young boys, covered up to make things look more pure.

              Purity's more than that though. Telling us not to talk about software purists is like telling us we can't talk about the military, because that's something the Holocaust survivors need exclusively to communicate what the Nazis did. It's like telling us we can't talk about monocultures, because that's something reserved to the Irish since they had the potato famine. Don't be a purity purist, is what I'm saying. You can still talk about assholes using purity to trick religious nuts into voting for The Devil Himself.

              CC: @artemis@dice.camp
              Acin ☆S Author-ized L.J.L 2 Replies Last reply
              0
              • CyC Cy
                Purity is bad regardless of who does it. It's bad because it enables sexual oppression, and literal oppression, and persecution of minorities, and homogenization of diversity. The same diversity keeping us from all simultaneously dying of the same virus. It's bad when people rely on purity to halt progress, because it goes beyond stopping people from doing bad things. It's bad when people rely on purity to further progress (you only get to argue with me if you are a Rationalist). Purity just... sucks. We want good things, not purity, and purity culture distorts reality until people are throwing away good things because they are labeled "disposable."

                So please do talk about fascism, and the role Christianity (and also Mormonism) plays in forcing it on modern society. Please talk about the assholes claiming some Christ fellow said they get to murder trannies for not being pure enough. Please expose all the abuses of church authority that seem to disproportionately happen to young boys, covered up to make things look more pure.

                Purity's more than that though. Telling us not to talk about software purists is like telling us we can't talk about the military, because that's something the Holocaust survivors need exclusively to communicate what the Nazis did. It's like telling us we can't talk about monocultures, because that's something reserved to the Irish since they had the potato famine. Don't be a purity purist, is what I'm saying. You can still talk about assholes using purity to trick religious nuts into voting for The Devil Himself.

                CC: @artemis@dice.camp
                Acin ☆S This user is from outside of this forum
                Acin ☆S This user is from outside of this forum
                Acin ☆
                wrote last edited by
                #43

                @cy you're talking about your definition of *purity*. What do you think is the *purity culture* Doctorow was referencing?

                In my reading, he was directing an accusation at the targets and victims of religious purity culture for our arguments against the use of technology that feels like an extension of it, has threatened autonomy and relationships in similar ways, and continues to undermine natural ecosystems, which the religious purists do using different methods. In other words, it felt to me like a spin, or appropriation, of the word.

                *Purity culture* is so often used for religious purity culture, an established thing that involves mainstream media and other social institutions, but he was using the term the way Christian nationalists talk about people who resist Christianity being in everything.

                @artemis @foolishowl

                CyC 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • Matilda LoveM Matilda Love

                  @artemis oh of course it's fucking doctorow, of course that's why i keep hearing this stupid argument about not being nice enough to "leftists" who embrace fascist-friendly values

                  Acin ☆S This user is from outside of this forum
                  Acin ☆S This user is from outside of this forum
                  Acin ☆
                  wrote last edited by
                  #44

                  @matildalove I saw him arguing here on Mastodon that his post doesn't read as (little-l) libertarian. It's, um, not as convincing as he was going for, I'm sure.

                  @artemis

                  Matilda LoveM 1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • Acin ☆S Acin ☆

                    @cy you're talking about your definition of *purity*. What do you think is the *purity culture* Doctorow was referencing?

                    In my reading, he was directing an accusation at the targets and victims of religious purity culture for our arguments against the use of technology that feels like an extension of it, has threatened autonomy and relationships in similar ways, and continues to undermine natural ecosystems, which the religious purists do using different methods. In other words, it felt to me like a spin, or appropriation, of the word.

                    *Purity culture* is so often used for religious purity culture, an established thing that involves mainstream media and other social institutions, but he was using the term the way Christian nationalists talk about people who resist Christianity being in everything.

                    @artemis @foolishowl

                    CyC This user is from outside of this forum
                    CyC This user is from outside of this forum
                    Cy
                    wrote last edited by
                    #45
                    Eh, I don't usually read that guy's blog so couldn't tell you. I just think that none of us are immune and a culture of purity is something you have to guard against, even if the other side is driven by the same madness. Not saying technology is good or anything.

                    CC: @artemis@dice.camp @foolishowl@social.coop
                    Acin ☆S 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • CyC Cy
                      Eh, I don't usually read that guy's blog so couldn't tell you. I just think that none of us are immune and a culture of purity is something you have to guard against, even if the other side is driven by the same madness. Not saying technology is good or anything.

                      CC: @artemis@dice.camp @foolishowl@social.coop
                      Acin ☆S This user is from outside of this forum
                      Acin ☆S This user is from outside of this forum
                      Acin ☆
                      wrote last edited by
                      #46

                      @cy it might help to read his AI line editor post, or part of it, to know what Artemis is referring to.

                      @artemis @foolishowl

                      CyC 1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • Acin ☆S Acin ☆

                        @cy it might help to read his AI line editor post, or part of it, to know what Artemis is referring to.

                        @artemis @foolishowl

                        CyC This user is from outside of this forum
                        CyC This user is from outside of this forum
                        Cy
                        wrote last edited by
                        #47
                        Do you have a link?

                        CC: @artemis@dice.camp @foolishowl@social.coop
                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • ArtemisA Artemis

                          So, in my circles, the phrase "purity culture" refers to the harmful & abusive attitudes & behavior around sex & sexuality in religious communities (especially within evangelicalism).

                          I'm seeing discussion of Cory Doctorow's use of the term "purity culture" to mean something like people who are (supposedly) so obsessed with being perfectly ethical that they harass others and...I dunno...halt progress. I guess he's not the only one who uses it that way, but it's news to me.

                          A Flock of BeaglesB This user is from outside of this forum
                          A Flock of BeaglesB This user is from outside of this forum
                          A Flock of Beagles
                          wrote last edited by
                          #48

                          @artemis it's a very cynical, abuse culture way to use that word. i think either you or someone else mentioned that it's a way to shame people for having any fucking principles and sticking to them. that's what i've been accused of before.

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • ArtemisA Artemis

                            So, in my circles, the phrase "purity culture" refers to the harmful & abusive attitudes & behavior around sex & sexuality in religious communities (especially within evangelicalism).

                            I'm seeing discussion of Cory Doctorow's use of the term "purity culture" to mean something like people who are (supposedly) so obsessed with being perfectly ethical that they harass others and...I dunno...halt progress. I guess he's not the only one who uses it that way, but it's news to me.

                            TL JordanD This user is from outside of this forum
                            TL JordanD This user is from outside of this forum
                            TL Jordan
                            wrote last edited by
                            #49

                            @artemis
                            The way he misused it has a strong association with the MAGA movement. They mean it in a pejorative sense akin to 'virtue signaling'. It's jarring when it comes from a well-known liberal.

                            I don't know if Doctorow is still active on the website formerly known as Twitter, but if he is, it's truly a brain-cooking, pickling vat of MAGA, manosphere, white nationalist depravity...
                            Maybe he picked it up there. No one is immune to bullshit. They just have to stew in it long enough.

                            There is also a haughtiness about it. Like he knows he is doing something that merits being shamed, so he is shaming the would-be scolds before they emerge, if ever they do. I'll extend him grace unless and until he doubles down or whistles another MAGA sounding tune.

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • CyC Cy
                              Purity is bad regardless of who does it. It's bad because it enables sexual oppression, and literal oppression, and persecution of minorities, and homogenization of diversity. The same diversity keeping us from all simultaneously dying of the same virus. It's bad when people rely on purity to halt progress, because it goes beyond stopping people from doing bad things. It's bad when people rely on purity to further progress (you only get to argue with me if you are a Rationalist). Purity just... sucks. We want good things, not purity, and purity culture distorts reality until people are throwing away good things because they are labeled "disposable."

                              So please do talk about fascism, and the role Christianity (and also Mormonism) plays in forcing it on modern society. Please talk about the assholes claiming some Christ fellow said they get to murder trannies for not being pure enough. Please expose all the abuses of church authority that seem to disproportionately happen to young boys, covered up to make things look more pure.

                              Purity's more than that though. Telling us not to talk about software purists is like telling us we can't talk about the military, because that's something the Holocaust survivors need exclusively to communicate what the Nazis did. It's like telling us we can't talk about monocultures, because that's something reserved to the Irish since they had the potato famine. Don't be a purity purist, is what I'm saying. You can still talk about assholes using purity to trick religious nuts into voting for The Devil Himself.

                              CC: @artemis@dice.camp
                              Author-ized L.J.L This user is from outside of this forum
                              Author-ized L.J.L This user is from outside of this forum
                              Author-ized L.J.
                              wrote last edited by
                              #50

                              @cy @artemis @foolishowl expressions like "moralism" and "moral absolutism" are right there, and exactly fit what Doctorow was criticizing. There was no need to reach out and take a term survivors of a very specific abuse are using, farther confusing the issue.

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • ArtemisA Artemis

                                Purity culture created a lot of the worst aspects of my religious trauma. MY WHOLE LIFE was purity culture. Everything I did, every interaction I had before my mid 20s was shaped by it.

                                Would it be so bad to just let us survivors of religious trauma use a combination of words which really didn't get used much at all for anything before we coined it & started using it? Nobody was using it for much, we started using it & now apparently it's a popular term for something almost completely separate.

                                Alephwyr: Most Normal DragonA This user is from outside of this forum
                                Alephwyr: Most Normal DragonA This user is from outside of this forum
                                Alephwyr: Most Normal Dragon
                                wrote last edited by
                                #51

                                @artemis There could be understood lexical priority that was in turn made legible through it's associations with particular spaces. I'm all for voluntary rules about language use, especially if they are simple and obvious enough that they can be quickly explained and adopted, and that simply seeing people use them is instructive for the average person in most cases. I'm getting tired of prescriptivism about language among people of conscience. Having essential language taken away from you is bad. But also, sometimes the person "taking it away" is someone who has needed access to language they have never had, or that they themselves have previously had taken away. What happens if tomorrow, the language you want not taken away has been taken away, and the people who have taken it away memory hole that you ever had a claim to it, and they turn around and speak your own words to you about not wanting their language taken away?

                                Alephwyr: Most Normal DragonA john.brown_typefaceJ 2 Replies Last reply
                                0
                                • Alephwyr: Most Normal DragonA Alephwyr: Most Normal Dragon

                                  @artemis There could be understood lexical priority that was in turn made legible through it's associations with particular spaces. I'm all for voluntary rules about language use, especially if they are simple and obvious enough that they can be quickly explained and adopted, and that simply seeing people use them is instructive for the average person in most cases. I'm getting tired of prescriptivism about language among people of conscience. Having essential language taken away from you is bad. But also, sometimes the person "taking it away" is someone who has needed access to language they have never had, or that they themselves have previously had taken away. What happens if tomorrow, the language you want not taken away has been taken away, and the people who have taken it away memory hole that you ever had a claim to it, and they turn around and speak your own words to you about not wanting their language taken away?

                                  Alephwyr: Most Normal DragonA This user is from outside of this forum
                                  Alephwyr: Most Normal DragonA This user is from outside of this forum
                                  Alephwyr: Most Normal Dragon
                                  wrote last edited by
                                  #52

                                  @artemis And it's worse than this, because there can be convergent evolution in language, either simultaneously or in epistemically isolated groups, such that nobody is stealing anything, they are all just behaving and speaking rationally. Linguistic prescriptivism imposes costs on people, it's a good idea to look for alternatives.

                                  Alephwyr: Most Normal DragonA 1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • ArtemisA Artemis

                                    It's really frustrating having a term people like me use to describe the trauma that shaped us picked up & used in some vague & non-specific way for no particular reason.

                                    If you Google the term, you'll see references to the meaning I am using. People can come up with another term for their annoyance at people who have opinions about what they should or shouldn't do.

                                    Don't steal terms from trauma survivors. We're using those.

                                    AbieT This user is from outside of this forum
                                    AbieT This user is from outside of this forum
                                    Abie
                                    wrote last edited by
                                    #53

                                    @artemis would activism purity test (or something similar) as a substitute be acceptable?

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • Alephwyr: Most Normal DragonA Alephwyr: Most Normal Dragon

                                      @artemis And it's worse than this, because there can be convergent evolution in language, either simultaneously or in epistemically isolated groups, such that nobody is stealing anything, they are all just behaving and speaking rationally. Linguistic prescriptivism imposes costs on people, it's a good idea to look for alternatives.

                                      Alephwyr: Most Normal DragonA This user is from outside of this forum
                                      Alephwyr: Most Normal DragonA This user is from outside of this forum
                                      Alephwyr: Most Normal Dragon
                                      wrote last edited by
                                      #54

                                      @artemis Also, I don't actually like the use Doctorow is applying it to, so I don't mind yelling at him in general. But the argument then is that this is a case where it is a bad word choice even before the contested use cases for the words come into play.

                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • Alephwyr: Most Normal DragonA Alephwyr: Most Normal Dragon

                                        @artemis There could be understood lexical priority that was in turn made legible through it's associations with particular spaces. I'm all for voluntary rules about language use, especially if they are simple and obvious enough that they can be quickly explained and adopted, and that simply seeing people use them is instructive for the average person in most cases. I'm getting tired of prescriptivism about language among people of conscience. Having essential language taken away from you is bad. But also, sometimes the person "taking it away" is someone who has needed access to language they have never had, or that they themselves have previously had taken away. What happens if tomorrow, the language you want not taken away has been taken away, and the people who have taken it away memory hole that you ever had a claim to it, and they turn around and speak your own words to you about not wanting their language taken away?

                                        john.brown_typefaceJ This user is from outside of this forum
                                        john.brown_typefaceJ This user is from outside of this forum
                                        john.brown_typeface
                                        wrote last edited by
                                        #55

                                        @Alephwyr @artemis
                                        i think i agree with what you're saying

                                        but, also, the phrase that describes what Cory is talking about it "purity politics" (one could use others).

                                        it could be that something else is also described with "purity culture" but there's another term that directly refers to what he means (even though the situation isn't really about purity politics)

                                        Alephwyr: Most Normal DragonA 1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • john.brown_typefaceJ john.brown_typeface

                                          @Alephwyr @artemis
                                          i think i agree with what you're saying

                                          but, also, the phrase that describes what Cory is talking about it "purity politics" (one could use others).

                                          it could be that something else is also described with "purity culture" but there's another term that directly refers to what he means (even though the situation isn't really about purity politics)

                                          Alephwyr: Most Normal DragonA This user is from outside of this forum
                                          Alephwyr: Most Normal DragonA This user is from outside of this forum
                                          Alephwyr: Most Normal Dragon
                                          wrote last edited by
                                          #56

                                          @johnbrowntypeface @artemis There are a dozen different stupid aspects of the invectives against purity politics:

                                          1. Every past system is a result of compromises and shortcuts
                                          2. Compromises and shortcuts snowball
                                          3. By the time the situation is dire, it is downstream of innumerable compromises and shortcuts, and the solution proposed is then a final doubling down, pulling the last stable block from the Jenga tower of false pragmatism
                                          4. The type of person who makes this error is generally not very perceptive
                                          4a. Inferentially, the type of person who makes this error is then usually not proximate to any real matter constitutive of the problem
                                          4a1. Not being proximate has both epistemic and practical consequences which are robust even outside of the specific error

                                          Alephwyr: Most Normal DragonA john.brown_typefaceJ 2 Replies Last reply
                                          0

                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          Powered by NodeBB Contributors
                                          • First post
                                            Last post