When I hear the term “puritan” my immediate assumption is that the speaker has no actual knowledge or insight or experience regarding Christianity, Christian practices, Christian theology, or Christians as people. I assume the speaker does wish to signal a kind of non-christian lifestyle but simply has no actual clue.
It’s a phenomenon that demands serious attention. People have been doxxed, outed, sexually harassed, made targets of racial and sexual bigotry, and killed over being seen as “disgusting”.
That is true to an extent, but in my experience the word has often been used to shut down any kind of discussion of sex or sexuality that isn’t explicitly pro-hedonism.
What does pro-hedonism mean to you?
The liberal idea that people should just “do whatever they want” irregardless of the implications & consequences because it’s not “anyone else’s business”.
This is presented as a “liberation” of sexuality when it’s actually just chaos without accountability. There are both ethical and unethical ways to conduct sexual activity and differentiating between them goes far beyond just getting verbal consent from another adult, but we’re not going to establish what those are if every attempt to confront potentially unethical practices is met with accusations of being “prudish” or “puritan”.
I don’t think it’s a stretch to say that we should all want to be safe and comfortable while having sex and in order to get to that point we need to establish what is and is not safe and where comfort becomes discomfort. I’m not an anarchist and thus I don’t believe we should just “leave it be” and let society “work it out” on its own - which is really just code for “shut up and stop talking about it”.
How do we define comfort and safety outside of consent and safe practices?
Well, that’s the point discussion isn’t it?
There’s an argument to be made that prostitution is rape & exploitation, that BDSM is rape & abuse, and similar arguments despite ostensibly being “safe” and “consensual”. Certain people seem incapable of handling the idea that what they think is harmless might not be harmless and rather than engage with an actual discussion and debate on whether or not that is the case would rather blindly label those they disagree with as “prudes” and “puritans” who hate sex, women, and minorities and want to push a radical heteronormative Christian agenda or something equally nonsensical.
Prostitution yes, but I’m…politely, I will say I’m unsure how you could classify bdsm as “rape and abuse.” What even is bdsm in this context? If I wear some fuzzy handcuffs, am I being raped and abused? Or is it only for “extreme kinks”
To be clear: I don’t hold this specific view on BDSM myself, though I kinda get the logic behind it. I was just using it as an example as I do think there is room for discussion over it rather than flat-out rejection or blind acceptance.
I believe those arguing against specifically address the powerlessness involved in being physically restrained and the broader implications of BDSM as a form of power fantasy but I’d need to brush up on those arguments more.
Is this is about the term puritan being misused to mean someone who is anti-sex when that’s not what it historically meant? I have a vague recollection of that being a thing, but I don’t know enough about it.
That is a big part of it.
But also how “puritans” are this supreme scapegoat historically that supposedly explains a wide range of American behaviors. It is used to leverage sexual politics but it is always clunky at best yet way too confident. I would say few Americans actually have puritan heritage.
The other part is personal. I have had a very specific relationship with Christianity and grew up in a hard-line family. Since living on the west coast I find that many ex-christians and Christians are completely dumbfounded by my experiences while I am dumbfounded by their severe lack of knowledge on Christianity, the Bible, varying doctrines etc. Christians here are not, in my personal view, Christian at all. And most ex-christians who tell me their experiences have almost nothing in common with mine.
So generally when “puritans” come up, I anticipate nonsense.
Do you have a book on Puritan history you could recommend?
Interesting. I wonder then what makes up such a dramatic difference in experience? In my experience with religion in the US, which is largely with Catholicism but somewhat with “protestant” Christianity too, it seems largely to be about what you’d expect for religion that is allowed to exist under a colonial project turned global empire: token liberalism in teachings here and there, maybe some stuff about charity, but largely devoid of any and all revolutionary potential (such as through liberation theology).
Cool story
I doubt you think so.
