I mean, it’s good, sure. But it’s not like it’s one single thing. Fructose, glucose, water, and the pollen remnants that give it flavour other than “sweet,” and those really make a meaningful difference to flavour and are yummy.
But I think this is a specific instance of a bigger question in terms of “what does pure mean in a given context other than simple chemistry anyway?”
apparently it’s good for the skin but idk how ‘helpful’ a honey mask is. i did try some with green tea powder like some ‘recipes’/vids online but other than it feeling better (more so the feeling of removing sticky gunk off my face than feeling ‘moisturized’ idk if it rly helped my skin versus like a sheet mask, which i’m also not sure if those are all that great either but at the very least it’s a cooling 15 mins lol)
Exactly. There is not far from where I live a place where bees went to gather glucose from an M&Ms factory (easier than nearby fields?) and went to make blue honey. Whatever it was I take it that you wouldn’t call blue a quality of honey, and that it therefore isn’t pure per se.
Actually, pure PURE water is used at microchip factories, and it’s incredibly TOXIC. One sip of it and it starts leeching the minerals out of your body and killing you. 😗
That’s a myth. Tap water is almost distilled. If you eat anything at all, or drink anything else ever, distilled water is entirely incapable of killing you.
The health effects of purified water are still disputed, which is a good indication that they are not so obviously severe as to be called “incredibly toxic”. It’s not like heavy water
Nah. Pure water is no more toxic than standard (treated) tap water. Insofar as a toxicity effect exists it’s because you can reduce your body’s salt concentration, but that happens with ordinary tap water as well, since it too has far less salt in it than your own fluids will.
I can tell you personally that the DI water is the least toxic thing in a microchip factory. If they’re doing anything involving gold, there’s going to be vast amounts of cyanide all over the place; if they’re using glass for insulating, which is what we did in our components, then there’ll be HF to hand for cleaning; and then there’s the usual supply of other acids for etching stuff.
DI water poisons you on about the same scale as pineapple juice.
I can’t get that “purebred” label. I mean, pure means no “foreign” component, so what can be without any genetic influence from other species? Unless you’re creationist, it derived at a time. We should call them “normbred”.
Eh. Language is a convention rather than a science. “Purebred” might be largely an idiom rather than literal truth, but people know what the idiom means, and I’ve never heard anyone try to link it to ex-nihilo creationism. If you want to start a movement to replace an established term that’s doing its job just fine with a new phrase… well, you do you, I guess, but I don’t see the point.
You know, me and my lysdexia, I read your comment as “Purity is in the eye of the labrador.”
Objectively true.
We can only dream of being as good and pure as dogs think we are.
Yeah, dogs are Jesus honestly.
constantly being disappointed by humans yet never giving up on us.
Let us worship them from now on (through the sacrament of tummy rubs)
As Bob Franke said, “You’d better be ‘pure you,’ but you’d better not be no purist. It’s much too muddy over on holy ground.”
(https://bobfranke.com/in-this-night-1)
After some time doing other stuff, looking at this again I want to say both, kind of? Like, they are not less pure than before, part because this doesn’t mean they’ve lost anything, and part because their desires were a part of them anyway? They have not gained or lost purity.
*approaches Stephen Bierce’s hacked muzak player, whistling casually*
*looks left, then right, then pulls out a record labelled ‘God is a freak’ and swaps it for the one in the player*
*casually walks away, continuing to whistle*
(Is that how the muzak actually works? I’m too young to be in on this one :P)
Metatron: God? Lonely. But funny. He’s got a great sense of humor. Take sex for example. There’s nothing funnier than the ridiculous faces you people make mid-coitus.
Bethany: Sex is a joke in heaven?
Metatron: The way I understand it, it’s mostly a joke down here, too.
We were made in god’s image, but god has no passion, no humour, no curiosity. If god has sex, it must be all lofty and boring. What made sex shameful (and fun) was disobeying god and going for a life of pain *and* pleasure, rather than one of purity and submission. I like to think the Fall was not so much a helpless temptation as a well-reasoned choice.
Another Talmudic example: A wife is totes allowed to divorce her husband if he’s giving her less sex than she expected (based on his career when they got married). It goes into detail.
But then, Judaism also doesn’t have the Devil, or the Fall. It’s not big into submission. Guess you’re talking about Christian God. I dunno about that guy.
Yeah, definitely talking about the christian deity, catholic to be more precise. Quite the killjoy. Not really a fan. To me he is a god of order, hierarchy, whose best qualities are probably tolerance and forgiveness, but that comes with the caveat that the essence of the human condition is deficiency. Saintliness has to do with asceticism and self-control, truth is eternal, predefined, but ultimately unknowable, desires are inherently dangerous, the body is sacred in principle but constantly at risk of defilement in worldly affairs (politics are kind of an ugly and sad necessity) and of course inferior to the soul which is most definitely not of this world.
I dont love the Fall as a myth but if we’re saddled with it i prefer to reclaim it as a tale of rebellion and choice, of being sadly forced to choose between the magical innocence and harmony and truth of heaven and the satanic metaphysics of the world and the flesh and ambiguity, and obviously choosing the latter but also being like, “really god? You won’t allow us transcendance AND corporality?? Well fuck you daddy”, and walking out (christians insist we got kicked out after pitifully pleading with daddy to forgive us, but i disagree.)
Yes that’s how I see it too: as a metaphor for coming of age and setting out into the world on one’s own. Independence, freedom, choice, knowledge, and personal responsibility for the natural consequences of one’s own actions.
Or, in the alternative, it could read as a metaphor for the replacement of hunter-gatherer nomadic society by agricultural society, permanent geographic settlement, and specialized division of labor.
That and the story of Cain and Abel could be read as a metaphor for the Indo-Aryan horse/warrior culture and its invasion of indigenous agricultural societies across Eurasia.
…Dunno. I went to a religious high school, and they talked a lot about Bible stories as metaphors for world history. The “world history” class was basically a class on old Eurasian world religions. Not sure how much of that has any basis in current anthropological scholarship at all. Or how much was just fairy tales and pretty ideas.
Oh! That Fall. (I thought you’d meant the fall of Lucifer, my bad.) We do have that story where early humanity gets kicked out of Eden. And you’re in very good Jewish-scholarly company with the interpretations that this would be voluntary in order to progress and learn and have families, or that actually it’s a coming of age analogy about becoming responsible… that it’s not, like, a literal history with a wacky talking snake.
It’s unfortunate that Joyce’s sect went with the literal talking snake. (And punishment for women. Good job, Joyce’s sect.)
There are reams of anthropological papers on Cain and Abel.
I usually see them written as the Bronze Age tension between nomadic shepherds vs settled farmers. Different stories get popular when we need different things, and that shift towards agriculture is definitely something that folks were thinking about… It may be part of why these stories resonated so strongly for so long.
I haven’t seen horse/warrior personally, but I’m sure I haven’t read even 5% of the papers on it, and it sounds neat!
Leorale, the anthropological perspective you referred to makes more sense, actually. I think I must have gotten my memories mixed up. That “world history” (literature/mythology) class was decades ago…
Good question. I’d dive in with a Plaut Torah commentary — that’s the 5 books of Torah, in translation, with many scholars’ quick interpretations, in order of the text that they’re commenting on.
(It looks mad long, but don’t be intimidated, you can skip around as you’d like.)
(That one was @milu. Unfortunately I don’t remember the more anthropological books I used in my college Religions courses. But I remember I started with the Plaut.)
@Laura:
Haha i said “daddy” as more of a joke, I’m not sure how much that story speaks to me as a coming of age metaphor really.
I’m also suspicious of claims that myths somehow encode history, except possibly in the sense that they might tell us something about the societies that birthed them and held them to be important.
I see the Fall more as a bit of a struggle between worldviews, metaphysical sensitivities. I think to be a catholic, philosophically, you have to be invested in a radical separation between the earthly world — material, changing, relative– and some other spiritual realm that’s maybe mostly accessible post-mortem but that a part of you (your soul) can kind of sense and connect to in the here and now (prayers and such). And you have to believe that the “real” world is, in important ways, less real, even inferior. (I’ve reas Nietzsche buy i think that’sa fairly Nietzschean reading.)
Basically I see the myth of the Fall (in the as catholic tradition) as a poetic embodiment of a kind of yearning for platonic harmony and order, truth, knowability, in the face of a world of chaos and ambiguity. I like to read it as a philosophical choice to embrace of ambiguity and existential responsibility. I that sense i feel more affinity for satan and the rebellion of Eve than for god and his patriarchical order.
For me, it all kind of comes back to the question of unity within dualism and separation (“self” vs. “other”). It’s why Neon Genesis Evangelion appealed to me so deeply (despite its grossness).
There have been some interesting neurological studies on transcendence. How infants and neonates initially have no concept of differentiation between “self” and “other” and live in a kind of perpetual oneness. The researchers took functional MRIs of Catholic nuns engaging in ecstatic prayer, and found that the process caused the part of the brain, which develops as babies learn to differentiate themselves from the rest of the world, to go dormant. The nuns returned to that infant-state of blissful union.
There was a similar study done involving young male Catholic divinity students, attending Mass after taking LSD. Similar results.
But free will and human differences and effort and consequences are what make life meaningful. So we can’t live in that state of ecstatic “purity” all the time. It’d be like the Pax drug, in the Serenity/Firefly movie. Religion is the opiate of the masses, as Marx said. Transcendence is a drug.
So, for me, the challenge is to find connections within our life of inherent separation from others. Community within diversity and individualism. Mutual responsibility within self interest. Social commonweal even within the capitalist state. Unity within dualism.
As the Argentine Madres de la Plaza de Mayo shouted: “¡El ‘otro’ soy yo!”
YMMV, of course ! Just one spin on it, heavily influenced by SciFi and pop psychology!
There’s some amazing radical feminist Jewish theological scholars. But there are some amazing radical feminists in Catholic Liberation Theology too. Rad dames all over the place.
Interesting! I have very little experience or knowledge about all that. To the point where I’m not able to say if we’re talking about the same thing: i’m talking about metaphysical dualism versus materialism, or essentialism (“platonic ideals”) vs realism (“language is an arbitrary construct”). I have never experienced transcendence i think (except as a infant apparently ^^) but, do i get it right that you’re saying there’s this neurological reality of “oneness” that is a specific state of consciousness, and that it is interpreted in mystic theologies as a communion with god-as-the-universe? So a non-dualistic religious experience?
Now, tbf my “””interpretation””” of the Fall is purely for my own puerile rebellious enjoyment, i never doubted for a second that serious scholars have suggested far deeper and more interesting metaphysics than the caricature of christianity i took away from my education and early on decided i would have nothing to do with anymore =)
That said, any specific jewish and/or catholic radical feminist you want to recommend?
I’ve come to think of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil as a test that we passed. Humans are distinct moral agents, not sock puppets, and meant to be so. It’s sometimes a dirty job, but it’s ours.
As long as you’re not forcing or hurting the one you’re with, I doubt God is that moved by who you’re bumping uglies with. (The who thing about “men lyng with men” was more about non-procreative sex than dudes loving dudes)
I’m proud of Becky for doing this. She saw that Joyce was having a hard time, and decided to be honest. To say “hey, you know what? I’ve had sex. And it felt great! You should be able to enjoy yourself without feeling like you are a whore of Babylon.” if Joyce wants to date Joe, then she damn well can. Sorry Dorothy.
Friendships grow and change. Joyce and Becky after some growth away from each other, coming back to give the other some affirmation that’s needed to be heard is just…Just great. That’s how I take it at least.
I was not expecting Becky to be a great support here but I’m glad she is. Hopefully Joyce will be able to ask herself what she wants and what she needs. Also hoping she will apologize to Dorothy and Sarah for earlier, but still tell them she doesn’t want to be on a leash either.
what would she have to apologize for? they HAVE been all up in her business this entire time. Why should Joyce apologize for establishing boundaries and demanding that they’re respected from her friends who allegedly see her as an actual person with agency of her own?
I was more referencing the yelling. No one I can think of likes to be yelled at. Regardless of being right or wrong, being yelled at isn’t enjoyable. Also, while yelling can be therapeutic but is best reserved when alone or into a pillow or something.
Also she still hasn’t said anything about pissing off Dorothy when she wasn’t paying attention because of Joe.
I’m not saying she needs to formally apologize like she did something terrible. Just a simple, “Hey, I’m sorry I yelled, but you all need to respect my boundaries and not turn my life into a pissing match.”.
Also, this site is infuriating to use and I wish I had the words for how much it has pissed me off. I took me 13 tries to leave a single comment and still took forever for the site to stop fucking me over.
Becky being the one to come in clutch was not on my bingo board.
The purity thing messes you up good though. Even now 14 years removed from losing my virginity I still feel little like “am I the only person who gets horny” and objectively you know now you’re not but you still feel weird about it sometimes and it’s dumb and knowing that it’s dumb starts a whole feedback loop.
Took me a minute to figure out the meaning of Becky’s line at the end, but the general vibe I’m getting is that “we never left” means “we were never really pure in the first place.” Am I right?
It means they’ve been in the matrix this whole time. Becky’s about to produce and red and blue pill then give Joyce a decision that will change her life forever.
I’ve been trying to work this out myself. My first reaction was that Becky’s trying to convince Joyce that she’s still actually a christian, really, but I don’t think that’s right. I think it’s more likely to be either:
• As you said, ‘we were never really pure in the first place’, or
• They’re still pure. (Taken with Becky’s earlier line that ‘it’s not that pure’, I guess that means while she wouldn’t describe the act of sex as being pure, having sex doesn’t meant that you are impure yourself.)
(Hopefully that formatting works the way I’m hoping it does!)
Either they were never pure or they were always pure! I suspect Becky is heading for the latter, personally, but… either way, I think the idea is that purity is not what their church wanted them to believe it was.
I had a girlfriend in college who only wore shoes when she had to, to enter a building that required them. Otherwise she was barefoot. This is in the North Country of NY and the winters are nasty; lots of ice, and wind that steals your breath
When Becky first came out, it was by kissing Joyce. That came as a complete shock to Joyce, practically triggering a fight or flight response. (She chose fight – as in fight the establishment that hurt her friend, and fight her inner assumptions about belief)
At the time, Becky (and Joyce) assumed that Joyce’s response was due to Joyce being straight. But now it’s become more apparent that Joyce IS probably interested in women – just not Becky. It’s likely that to Joyce, Becky is her sister, and that closeness prevents her from seeing Becky as a potential romantic partner.
And here we have a dilemma. Joyce knows that hanky panky is a sin. Sinning knowing that God will forgive you is one of the most serious sins. On the other hand, Becky’s faith in divine love and that no mistake will throw you out of the house of God captivated my anti-clerical heart
Theological question, does God see a difference between different sins? Humans obviously do (as something that affects other people is normally considered a worse sin compared to one that doesn’t). I’m sure that Catholics and religions with purgatory or karma do, but what about protestant Christians?
He must, because different crimes are punishable by different punishments, at least in the old testament. Considering that they have all been paid for by one thing, though, maybe not anymore?
That’s some of those unwriten rule inside churches. Nobody knows exactly if all sins are the same or not.
Bible have said about sin against Holy Spirit. But it says about there’s no sin that can’t be “clean”. And people often teach things different from each other.
RCC has different categories: venial, mortal.
I was raised in a mainline protestant denomination, and they were pretty clear that all sins were equally sinful theologically, not counting the “unforgivable sin”. James 2:10-11
That theology functions to keep people feeling guilty and emotionally dependent on the religion for forgiveness.
That’s not Joyce’s problem right now though. She has inertia, in applying twisted values to things, that aren’t supported by what she actually thinks. Purity culture isn’t about fear of going to hell, it’s about convincing teenagers their value as a potential spouse, and as a person, is diminished if they have sex.
I’ve been told that the root meaning of “sin” is literally, physically, to turn your back on someone. So “sin” in the scriptural sense is (metaphorically) turning your back on God, refusing to engage. One could argue that, given this, every sin is the same and the differences we see are just details of how one has been rude to one’s Maker. And that sadness is as likely a reaction as anger.
But forgiveness requires repentance and you can’t repent while planning to continue sinning. Becky doesn’t consider sex with Dina something to repent. It can’t be a sin.
i mean it’s perfectly reasonable to have sex, decide it’s not for you and then move on with your life, plenty of other things to do unfortunately sometimes other ppl get weird about it even if you’re not ace
As someone who can’t have kids (inherently) – it absolutely has never shut them up for me. It just launches people around here into “Oh well you can adopt! What about surrogacy! Just keep trying, I’m sure a miracle will happen!”
I just wish people would shut up and keep their intrusive bullshit to themselves.
important note: This is in no way meant to say you shouldn’t do whatever works for you, just that I’m envious it doesn’t work for me.
People really care way too much about other people’s bodies. It’s a personal affront to them if you don’t use your body how they want you to. But of course, that somehow never applies to them. If I go up to a child-having propagandist and badger them with all these options they could pick that result in not having a kid, they’ll act like I’ve said something horrible to them.
And you see it everywhere, even for shit that doesn’t matter in any tangible way. I can say “My Dark Magician deck isn’t meant to be used for competitive play”, and at least one person always comes over and starts suggesting I add all these competitive staples, as if I asked, as if I said I wanted to play that way, and as if anyone had been so much as glancing at them in the first place, let alone asking them for deck-building advice.
The big difference is that I can steal the card player’s best card and eat it in front of them without meaningful societal retribution.
On a more serious note, while I do want to be a parent through adoption someday, I have some fairly negative feelings toward human reproduction. Not in a moral sense, but in that it squicks me the fuck out. But you know what I do around people who want to/are trying to/already have kids that way? I keep it to my damn self.
I’d think we’d benefit from a more communal approach to childrearing, personally. If you have one or two people who don’t really know how to raise a child, but they are tasked with being the main person/people raising a child… well, some manage to figure it out, but for a lot it’s what you might expect. If there was more support, there’d be more people for the parents to learn from, more people to help out the parents, and more people to intervene if something is seriously wrong.
Sure, but then people wouldn’t feel so isolated and helpless all the time, and therefore wouldn’t be as easy to indoctrinate into accepting lives of pointless toil and drudgery for the benefit of heartless capitalists.
this might be my own interpretation, but I think Joyce is still holding on to the idea that virginity is the physical hymen and you lose your virginity by breaking it. Therefore lesbian sex “doesn’t count” as far as the church is concerned, so Becky can still “go back” if she wants to, but Joyce, being straight and likely having PiV sex, would be tainted forever
No, I don’t think so. I really think she knows lesbian sex is just as valid as hetero sex. I read it as Joyce’s struggle is she’s horny, finds Joe super hot, likes him increasingly as a person and has a crush on him, and wants to bone him. Dina and Becky having sex is different to her because they are in love, and Joyce thinks they were meant to be together. Basically, she’s gotten over her hangup about premarital sex, I think, but not sex in a less-than-committed relationship. And I read Becky’s advice as her reassuring Joyce that any sex doesn’t change who a person is or their value, so Joyce doesn’t have to fear that. It’s much better advice than Dorothy’s misplaced momming and accidental reinforcement of the concept of purity by saying Joyce should “not do something she’ll regret.” Yay for Becky helping destigmatize sex!
I love the way you explained this and agree 100%. Joyce opposes Dina and Becky being in love with her being “a gross weirdo” – she’s ashamed of having the hornies for someone with whom she’s not in a committed, loving, long term relationship not too dissimilar to marriage.
And as someone who still struggles with this several years after leaving a sex-shaming cult, I relate to her a lot and I love that Becky is here to help in a healthy way.
@hovertext, can you just imagine, a hallway that’s vaguely depicted as both short and long, filled with doors with almost nothing to distinguish themselves except alternating red and blue framed whiteboards?
It’s funny, you can really see the soft-sciences influence here. In metallurgy, “Purity is weakness’. Pure iron is both soft and brittle, it’s useless for pretty much everything. the strength comes form alloying elements and impurities like carbon. You know what you get if you breed an animal for purity? iNbreeding, emphasizing all the weakening traits. (pit a purebred versus a mutt, the purebred may have one or two positive traits, the mutt’s better equipped for survival and health).
“Pure” ideas fail CONSTANTLY throughout history,as fanatics tend to result in self-destruction if they aren’t taken down by non-fanatical general populations (both directly and indirectly).
OK, Joyce, what do you mean by “pure” and what does that actually have to do with purity? What is it that is supposed to be unmixed? Why do you think Becky has it and you dont?
These concepts are more packed-up than the littlest matryoshka doll. Take it to Gender Studies and give Leslie something to work with.
I mostly lurk in the comments on here, but I wanted to make a comment for this strip. That last line from Becky is seriously changing my outlook on sex and sexuality. It feels like something has finally clicked. It’s hard not to feel shame especially when you’re a lesbian who grew up Christian like myself, but hopefully this will help me begin to heal. Thank you.
Loading ...
you can too go back to being pure
through distillation
…
wait no?
It’s true. I’ve purified myself with distilled spirits many times and can attest.
Also reverse osmosis.
sisomso.
If sanitized = pure, then yes, alcohol works for that.
Once upon a time, the then-President told me to disinfect my insides and I listened! (Even though he prides himself on never having done so.)
No, lesbians form an azeotrope.
Welcome to Purity Town. Population: Joyce, Becky, and a velociraptor.
Plus all the asexually reproducing microorganisms.
Haha, I get it! Funny joke!
Also home to pure evil
Eh Purity is overrated. Name one good thing that’s pure.
Honey.
Honey’s overrated. There’s honey in my shampoo and I can’t imagine it’s doing a damn thing to help.
That’s because it’s not pure honey!
That’s right, you’ve gotta slather honey in your hair. That can only lead to good things. 🙂
It’s a great way for a maiden fair to attract a bear
How is honey pure though?
I mean, it’s good, sure. But it’s not like it’s one single thing. Fructose, glucose, water, and the pollen remnants that give it flavour other than “sweet,” and those really make a meaningful difference to flavour and are yummy.
But I think this is a specific instance of a bigger question in terms of “what does pure mean in a given context other than simple chemistry anyway?”
apparently it’s good for the skin but idk how ‘helpful’ a honey mask is. i did try some with green tea powder like some ‘recipes’/vids online but other than it feeling better (more so the feeling of removing sticky gunk off my face than feeling ‘moisturized’ idk if it rly helped my skin versus like a sheet mask, which i’m also not sure if those are all that great either but at the very least it’s a cooling 15 mins lol)
Exactly. There is not far from where I live a place where bees went to gather glucose from an M&Ms factory (easier than nearby fields?) and went to make blue honey. Whatever it was I take it that you wouldn’t call blue a quality of honey, and that it therefore isn’t pure per se.
I generally prefer my water to not have stuff that makes me sick in it.
True but how much water is truly, truly pure? Nothing in it. No bacteria at all? Nothing else? It’s not PURE. It’s just clear.
Yeah, you have to go to distilled water for that, and distilled water is definitely less good than say, good tap water or all sorts of other sources.
pure is relative.
Actually, pure PURE water is used at microchip factories, and it’s incredibly TOXIC. One sip of it and it starts leeching the minerals out of your body and killing you. 😗
Hey, purity being toxic. I guess that’s the whole metaphor. 😆
That’s a myth. Tap water is almost distilled. If you eat anything at all, or drink anything else ever, distilled water is entirely incapable of killing you.
Well, as always, it’s about the amount. One sip won’t do anything. A litre? Might wanna start living some salt, but probably okay. 10L? You ded.
*licking goddamit
The health effects of purified water are still disputed, which is a good indication that they are not so obviously severe as to be called “incredibly toxic”. It’s not like heavy water
Nah. Pure water is no more toxic than standard (treated) tap water. Insofar as a toxicity effect exists it’s because you can reduce your body’s salt concentration, but that happens with ordinary tap water as well, since it too has far less salt in it than your own fluids will.
Dihydrogen monoxide inhalation is the cause of thousands of deaths per year.
I can tell you personally that the DI water is the least toxic thing in a microchip factory. If they’re doing anything involving gold, there’s going to be vast amounts of cyanide all over the place; if they’re using glass for insulating, which is what we did in our components, then there’ll be HF to hand for cleaning; and then there’s the usual supply of other acids for etching stuff.
DI water poisons you on about the same scale as pineapple juice.
“Pure Imagination” from Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory.
Oo, good answer.
If you are to believe the slogan from last century, Ivory Soap.
Actually, Ivory only claimed to be 99 and 44/100 percent pure. (Also to float)
Close enough for jazz
Everclear.
Everclear: Because your memory won’t erase itself
Everclear: Because determined people can drink anything. Even gasoline!
100% Pure Cane Sugar.
The family dogs are purebreds, and they’re good dogs.
… and they’re our precious babies so if you badmouth them in any way beyond calling them literal unfiltered bongoes I will END you.
I can’t get that “purebred” label. I mean, pure means no “foreign” component, so what can be without any genetic influence from other species? Unless you’re creationist, it derived at a time. We should call them “normbred”.
Eh. Language is a convention rather than a science. “Purebred” might be largely an idiom rather than literal truth, but people know what the idiom means, and I’ve never heard anyone try to link it to ex-nihilo creationism. If you want to start a movement to replace an established term that’s doing its job just fine with a new phrase… well, you do you, I guess, but I don’t see the point.
Pure Power is a good Pokémon ability, that’s the only one I bet
A pure vacuum is a REALLY good insulator.
Pure vacuum SUCKS.
It sucks SO HARD
Cocaine.
At least, it better be
Oh, i have news for you
You. You are pure unadulterated Yotomoe.
And also wholesome content like this.
Purity is in the eye of the beholder. Many kinds of it are overrated anyway.
You know, me and my lysdexia, I read your comment as “Purity is in the eye of the labrador.”
Objectively true.
We can only dream of being as good and pure as dogs think we are.
Yeah, dogs are Jesus honestly.
constantly being disappointed by humans yet never giving up on us.
Let us worship them from now on (through the sacrament of tummy rubs)
Amen!
Exactly. My dog is a pure boy. <3
Acts 10:15.
Pretty much the inspiration for the invented religion in Stranger In a Strange Land, as far as I’m concerned.
As Bob Franke said, “You’d better be ‘pure you,’ but you’d better not be no purist. It’s much too muddy over on holy ground.”
(https://bobfranke.com/in-this-night-1)
as long as that’s “you never stop being pure” and not “you’ve never stopped being Christian” I’m good with it
I assumed it was along the lines of “you can’t go back… because we’ve always had this interest in sex. Acting on them doesn’t change us”.
also good and probably better than my read
After some time doing other stuff, looking at this again I want to say both, kind of? Like, they are not less pure than before, part because this doesn’t mean they’ve lost anything, and part because their desires were a part of them anyway? They have not gained or lost purity.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DpGy5bTzVSU
I was interpreting as the second one
I’m not from purity culture but I likewise thought Becky was saying they didn’t leave a state of purity, sex doesn’t ruin them after all.
I wonder if god really cares that much about who is banging.
God watches. That pervert!
*approaches Stephen Bierce’s hacked muzak player, whistling casually*
*looks left, then right, then pulls out a record labelled ‘God is a freak’ and swaps it for the one in the player*
*casually walks away, continuing to whistle*
(Is that how the muzak actually works? I’m too young to be in on this one :P)
From Kevin Smith’s film “Dogma”:
Bethany: What’s he like?
Metatron: God? Lonely. But funny. He’s got a great sense of humor. Take sex for example. There’s nothing funnier than the ridiculous faces you people make mid-coitus.
Bethany: Sex is a joke in heaven?
Metatron: The way I understand it, it’s mostly a joke down here, too.
Assuming we were actually made in God’s image? … yeah, probably, way too much.
We were made in god’s image, but god has no passion, no humour, no curiosity. If god has sex, it must be all lofty and boring. What made sex shameful (and fun) was disobeying god and going for a life of pain *and* pleasure, rather than one of purity and submission. I like to think the Fall was not so much a helpless temptation as a well-reasoned choice.
Jewish God definitely has passion, humor, and curiosity.
(For example, in the Talmud, the sages depict themselves making God laugh in surprise and delight.)
Jewish God is also sex-positive, within marriage.
Another Talmudic example: A wife is totes allowed to divorce her husband if he’s giving her less sex than she expected (based on his career when they got married). It goes into detail.
But then, Judaism also doesn’t have the Devil, or the Fall. It’s not big into submission. Guess you’re talking about Christian God. I dunno about that guy.
Yeah, definitely talking about the christian deity, catholic to be more precise. Quite the killjoy. Not really a fan. To me he is a god of order, hierarchy, whose best qualities are probably tolerance and forgiveness, but that comes with the caveat that the essence of the human condition is deficiency. Saintliness has to do with asceticism and self-control, truth is eternal, predefined, but ultimately unknowable, desires are inherently dangerous, the body is sacred in principle but constantly at risk of defilement in worldly affairs (politics are kind of an ugly and sad necessity) and of course inferior to the soul which is most definitely not of this world.
I dont love the Fall as a myth but if we’re saddled with it i prefer to reclaim it as a tale of rebellion and choice, of being sadly forced to choose between the magical innocence and harmony and truth of heaven and the satanic metaphysics of the world and the flesh and ambiguity, and obviously choosing the latter but also being like, “really god? You won’t allow us transcendance AND corporality?? Well fuck you daddy”, and walking out (christians insist we got kicked out after pitifully pleading with daddy to forgive us, but i disagree.)
Yes that’s how I see it too: as a metaphor for coming of age and setting out into the world on one’s own. Independence, freedom, choice, knowledge, and personal responsibility for the natural consequences of one’s own actions.
Or, in the alternative, it could read as a metaphor for the replacement of hunter-gatherer nomadic society by agricultural society, permanent geographic settlement, and specialized division of labor.
That and the story of Cain and Abel could be read as a metaphor for the Indo-Aryan horse/warrior culture and its invasion of indigenous agricultural societies across Eurasia.
…Dunno. I went to a religious high school, and they talked a lot about Bible stories as metaphors for world history. The “world history” class was basically a class on old Eurasian world religions. Not sure how much of that has any basis in current anthropological scholarship at all. Or how much was just fairy tales and pretty ideas.
Oh! That Fall. (I thought you’d meant the fall of Lucifer, my bad.) We do have that story where early humanity gets kicked out of Eden. And you’re in very good Jewish-scholarly company with the interpretations that this would be voluntary in order to progress and learn and have families, or that actually it’s a coming of age analogy about becoming responsible… that it’s not, like, a literal history with a wacky talking snake.
It’s unfortunate that Joyce’s sect went with the literal talking snake. (And punishment for women. Good job, Joyce’s sect.)
There are reams of anthropological papers on Cain and Abel.
I usually see them written as the Bronze Age tension between nomadic shepherds vs settled farmers. Different stories get popular when we need different things, and that shift towards agriculture is definitely something that folks were thinking about… It may be part of why these stories resonated so strongly for so long.
I haven’t seen horse/warrior personally, but I’m sure I haven’t read even 5% of the papers on it, and it sounds neat!
@Leorale: ooh, nice! Yes, jewish theology seems really interesting. I’ve never read any but i might! Do you have any favourite authors to recommend?
Leorale, the anthropological perspective you referred to makes more sense, actually. I think I must have gotten my memories mixed up. That “world history” (literature/mythology) class was decades ago…
Good question. I’d dive in with a Plaut Torah commentary — that’s the 5 books of Torah, in translation, with many scholars’ quick interpretations, in order of the text that they’re commenting on.
(It looks mad long, but don’t be intimidated, you can skip around as you’d like.)
(That one was @milu. Unfortunately I don’t remember the more anthropological books I used in my college Religions courses. But I remember I started with the Plaut.)
@Leorale: thanks!
@Laura:
Haha i said “daddy” as more of a joke, I’m not sure how much that story speaks to me as a coming of age metaphor really.
I’m also suspicious of claims that myths somehow encode history, except possibly in the sense that they might tell us something about the societies that birthed them and held them to be important.
I see the Fall more as a bit of a struggle between worldviews, metaphysical sensitivities. I think to be a catholic, philosophically, you have to be invested in a radical separation between the earthly world — material, changing, relative– and some other spiritual realm that’s maybe mostly accessible post-mortem but that a part of you (your soul) can kind of sense and connect to in the here and now (prayers and such). And you have to believe that the “real” world is, in important ways, less real, even inferior. (I’ve reas Nietzsche buy i think that’sa fairly Nietzschean reading.)
Basically I see the myth of the Fall (in the as catholic tradition) as a poetic embodiment of a kind of yearning for platonic harmony and order, truth, knowability, in the face of a world of chaos and ambiguity. I like to read it as a philosophical choice to embrace of ambiguity and existential responsibility. I that sense i feel more affinity for satan and the rebellion of Eve than for god and his patriarchical order.
End of 2nd paragraph: *I’ve never read Nietzsche
For me, it all kind of comes back to the question of unity within dualism and separation (“self” vs. “other”). It’s why Neon Genesis Evangelion appealed to me so deeply (despite its grossness).
There have been some interesting neurological studies on transcendence. How infants and neonates initially have no concept of differentiation between “self” and “other” and live in a kind of perpetual oneness. The researchers took functional MRIs of Catholic nuns engaging in ecstatic prayer, and found that the process caused the part of the brain, which develops as babies learn to differentiate themselves from the rest of the world, to go dormant. The nuns returned to that infant-state of blissful union.
There was a similar study done involving young male Catholic divinity students, attending Mass after taking LSD. Similar results.
But free will and human differences and effort and consequences are what make life meaningful. So we can’t live in that state of ecstatic “purity” all the time. It’d be like the Pax drug, in the Serenity/Firefly movie. Religion is the opiate of the masses, as Marx said. Transcendence is a drug.
So, for me, the challenge is to find connections within our life of inherent separation from others. Community within diversity and individualism. Mutual responsibility within self interest. Social commonweal even within the capitalist state. Unity within dualism.
As the Argentine Madres de la Plaza de Mayo shouted: “¡El ‘otro’ soy yo!”
YMMV, of course ! Just one spin on it, heavily influenced by SciFi and pop psychology!
There’s some amazing radical feminist Jewish theological scholars. But there are some amazing radical feminists in Catholic Liberation Theology too. Rad dames all over the place.
Interesting! I have very little experience or knowledge about all that. To the point where I’m not able to say if we’re talking about the same thing: i’m talking about metaphysical dualism versus materialism, or essentialism (“platonic ideals”) vs realism (“language is an arbitrary construct”). I have never experienced transcendence i think (except as a infant apparently ^^) but, do i get it right that you’re saying there’s this neurological reality of “oneness” that is a specific state of consciousness, and that it is interpreted in mystic theologies as a communion with god-as-the-universe? So a non-dualistic religious experience?
Now, tbf my “””interpretation””” of the Fall is purely for my own puerile rebellious enjoyment, i never doubted for a second that serious scholars have suggested far deeper and more interesting metaphysics than the caricature of christianity i took away from my education and early on decided i would have nothing to do with anymore =)
That said, any specific jewish and/or catholic radical feminist you want to recommend?
Wow, what an insufferable comment i just wrote, bleh. Feel free to ignore me
Oh, let’s all be insufferable and have fun together! ;-D Let’s play in the sandbox of words on a rainy day and just have fun splashing around. 😀
I forget now the names of specific scholars and I’m sleepy. Good night!1
I’ve come to think of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil as a test that we passed. Humans are distinct moral agents, not sock puppets, and meant to be so. It’s sometimes a dirty job, but it’s ours.
As long as you’re not forcing or hurting the one you’re with, I doubt God is that moved by who you’re bumping uglies with. (The who thing about “men lyng with men” was more about non-procreative sex than dudes loving dudes)
Santa, OTOH…
Santa’s all about watching people who are getting naughty…
I wish I’d had a friend like Becky at this age. I’m still in therapy dealing with purity culture trauma.
That stinks! Sorry you’re going through that and I hope its getting better and that 2023 brings you joy. Purity culture can blow a dick goat
I’m proud of Becky for doing this. She saw that Joyce was having a hard time, and decided to be honest. To say “hey, you know what? I’ve had sex. And it felt great! You should be able to enjoy yourself without feeling like you are a whore of Babylon.” if Joyce wants to date Joe, then she damn well can. Sorry Dorothy.
Note that those are two completely separate ideas. Dorothy doesn’t care about the purity nonsense. She’s worried about Joe’s intentions.
If You Leave Me Now…
Friendships grow and change. Joyce and Becky after some growth away from each other, coming back to give the other some affirmation that’s needed to be heard is just…Just great. That’s how I take it at least.
I was not expecting Becky to be a great support here but I’m glad she is. Hopefully Joyce will be able to ask herself what she wants and what she needs. Also hoping she will apologize to Dorothy and Sarah for earlier, but still tell them she doesn’t want to be on a leash either.
I don’t think Joyce has anything to apologize for. Otherwise, I agree with this.
what would she have to apologize for? they HAVE been all up in her business this entire time. Why should Joyce apologize for establishing boundaries and demanding that they’re respected from her friends who allegedly see her as an actual person with agency of her own?
I was more referencing the yelling. No one I can think of likes to be yelled at. Regardless of being right or wrong, being yelled at isn’t enjoyable. Also, while yelling can be therapeutic but is best reserved when alone or into a pillow or something.
Also she still hasn’t said anything about pissing off Dorothy when she wasn’t paying attention because of Joe.
I’m not saying she needs to formally apologize like she did something terrible. Just a simple, “Hey, I’m sorry I yelled, but you all need to respect my boundaries and not turn my life into a pissing match.”.
Apologize for what?
Also, this site is infuriating to use and I wish I had the words for how much it has pissed me off. I took me 13 tries to leave a single comment and still took forever for the site to stop fucking me over.
Firefox. uBlock origin. Patreon if that makes you feel bad about the loss of ad revenue to Willis.
Thank you, I shall make the switch, even if it is only for this site.
Becky being the one to come in clutch was not on my bingo board.
The purity thing messes you up good though. Even now 14 years removed from losing my virginity I still feel little like “am I the only person who gets horny” and objectively you know now you’re not but you still feel weird about it sometimes and it’s dumb and knowing that it’s dumb starts a whole feedback loop.
It was on mine. In fact I woulda bet money on it.
Took me a minute to figure out the meaning of Becky’s line at the end, but the general vibe I’m getting is that “we never left” means “we were never really pure in the first place.” Am I right?
I think so as well but we’d need confirmation from Willis. I can’t think of what else it could mean.
It means they’ve been in the matrix this whole time. Becky’s about to produce and red and blue pill then give Joyce a decision that will change her life forever.
The red one won’t be a pill.
That’s what I understood as well
I read it as “purity is a construct”, which is a fairly consistent epiphany with having amazing sex with Dina
I’ve been trying to work this out myself. My first reaction was that Becky’s trying to convince Joyce that she’s still actually a christian, really, but I don’t think that’s right. I think it’s more likely to be either:
(Hopefully that formatting works the way I’m hoping it does!)
Hmm, no that did not turn out the way I was expecting! 😛 Ah well, it’s still somewhat readable so it’ll do ^^
You can’t go back, because there’s no “you” to go back to. You’re still the same person even after your “impurity”.
This was how I took it too. You’re still you.
Either they were never pure or they were always pure! I suspect Becky is heading for the latter, personally, but… either way, I think the idea is that purity is not what their church wanted them to believe it was.
purity is an ✨illusion✨, and so is death lmaoI kinda took it as “If I’m not pure and chaste anymore, I can’t go back to Christianity if I change my mind.”
And Becky saying she never stopped being a Christian/religious?
I hope I’m off base, but we’ll see if they start fighting again.
I think she’s saying neither of them were ever “pure”
I read the same but I’m pretty sure it’s intended re purity, not christianity
“We can’t go back (to being pure) because we never left (being pure).”
That’s what seems like a fairly direct read to me. I guess if Becky had said “never stopped,” that meaning could have been clearer?
That’s how I read it. Because purity and virginity aren’t the same thing, whatever their religion says.
What did she really mean by “we never left”?
How many links does it take to get to the center of a tootsie-pop? Just what is a pokemon “master”? How does Sierra get around the snow with no shoes?
The world may never know. 😛
*licks.
Auto-replace, you are OUT of here 😑
I had a girlfriend in college who only wore shoes when she had to, to enter a building that required them. Otherwise she was barefoot. This is in the North Country of NY and the winters are nasty; lots of ice, and wind that steals your breath
The Grail was there from the beginning on, by the
fisherburger king and it was a plastic trail plate.If you look at it, the lore say only the pure can see it, but the “pure” Percy is seriously fucked up: thief, predator, contempter.
Side thought, are these (and earlier) knight christian stories allowed by fundies?
Joyce’s brain: “Becky says it’s okay to screw Joe!” Which is true.
THAT’S MY GIRL! BECKY HELL YES!!
You have one orange cat brain cell but god dammit you’re a Good Egg and this is what I love to see.
You have one orange cat brain cell
omg
i love this xD
I was going to make a joke about buttering Becky here, but I couldn’t think of a way of phrasing it where it didn’t sound like a sex thing.
These two are cute together. They should date.
You know, you’re right, I wonder why that’s never come up as an idea before now?? Because it definitely hasn’t, as long-time readers will recall.
When Becky first came out, it was by kissing Joyce. That came as a complete shock to Joyce, practically triggering a fight or flight response. (She chose fight – as in fight the establishment that hurt her friend, and fight her inner assumptions about belief)
At the time, Becky (and Joyce) assumed that Joyce’s response was due to Joyce being straight. But now it’s become more apparent that Joyce IS probably interested in women – just not Becky. It’s likely that to Joyce, Becky is her sister, and that closeness prevents her from seeing Becky as a potential romantic partner.
You have missed a joke.
On the Internet!
That never happened, you made it up. They are girlfriends now.
Dina resigned!
Yees, I’ll ship that! They’ll form an amazing couple.
wait
Pure is overrated.
Gimme that mess.
I am really glad if this means they’re getting past their tension. They’re good folk.
Feels a little like Becky’s having a realization as she’s telling Joyce. Having sex doesn’t make someone less of a person.
But imoto-san thats heresy!
Didn’t Joyce learn about forgiveness in church?
That Jesus can clean your sins and etc?
True, but I think Joyce’s church was a bit more rulebound.
See, e.g.:
https://www.dumbingofage.com/2022/comic/book-13/02-turning-saints-into-the-sea/helper/
And for explanation:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James,_brother_of_Jesus#cite_ref-29
And here we have a dilemma. Joyce knows that hanky panky is a sin. Sinning knowing that God will forgive you is one of the most serious sins. On the other hand, Becky’s faith in divine love and that no mistake will throw you out of the house of God captivated my anti-clerical heart
Theological question, does God see a difference between different sins? Humans obviously do (as something that affects other people is normally considered a worse sin compared to one that doesn’t). I’m sure that Catholics and religions with purgatory or karma do, but what about protestant Christians?
He must, because different crimes are punishable by different punishments, at least in the old testament. Considering that they have all been paid for by one thing, though, maybe not anymore?
The purpose of punishment is to discourage a behavior. It makes sense to me that different behaviors are best discouraged by different punishments.
That’s some of those unwriten rule inside churches. Nobody knows exactly if all sins are the same or not.
Bible have said about sin against Holy Spirit. But it says about there’s no sin that can’t be “clean”. And people often teach things different from each other.
RCC has different categories: venial, mortal.
I was raised in a mainline protestant denomination, and they were pretty clear that all sins were equally sinful theologically, not counting the “unforgivable sin”. James 2:10-11
That theology functions to keep people feeling guilty and emotionally dependent on the religion for forgiveness.
That’s not Joyce’s problem right now though. She has inertia, in applying twisted values to things, that aren’t supported by what she actually thinks. Purity culture isn’t about fear of going to hell, it’s about convincing teenagers their value as a potential spouse, and as a person, is diminished if they have sex.
I’ve been told that the root meaning of “sin” is literally, physically, to turn your back on someone. So “sin” in the scriptural sense is (metaphorically) turning your back on God, refusing to engage. One could argue that, given this, every sin is the same and the differences we see are just details of how one has been rude to one’s Maker. And that sadness is as likely a reaction as anger.
But forgiveness requires repentance and you can’t repent while planning to continue sinning. Becky doesn’t consider sex with Dina something to repent. It can’t be a sin.
She came from a fundie cult so, no. Everything “bad” she does will stain her forever and she’ll go to hell.
Except when it comes to the men in her cult like toedad. That’s when forgiveness suddenly starts mattering
i mean it’s perfectly reasonable to have sex, decide it’s not for you and then move on with your life, plenty of other things to do unfortunately sometimes other ppl get weird about it even if you’re not ace
Like how some people get weird if you don’t want to have kids.
Life hack about that:”I can’t have kids” shuts them up immediately (and is not even a lie if your on birth control or just can’t stand them :p)
As someone who can’t have kids (inherently) – it absolutely has never shut them up for me. It just launches people around here into “Oh well you can adopt! What about surrogacy! Just keep trying, I’m sure a miracle will happen!”
I just wish people would shut up and keep their intrusive bullshit to themselves.
important note: This is in no way meant to say you shouldn’t do whatever works for you, just that I’m envious it doesn’t work for me.
People really care way too much about other people’s bodies. It’s a personal affront to them if you don’t use your body how they want you to. But of course, that somehow never applies to them. If I go up to a child-having propagandist and badger them with all these options they could pick that result in not having a kid, they’ll act like I’ve said something horrible to them.
And you see it everywhere, even for shit that doesn’t matter in any tangible way. I can say “My Dark Magician deck isn’t meant to be used for competitive play”, and at least one person always comes over and starts suggesting I add all these competitive staples, as if I asked, as if I said I wanted to play that way, and as if anyone had been so much as glancing at them in the first place, let alone asking them for deck-building advice.
The big difference is that I can steal the card player’s best card and eat it in front of them without meaningful societal retribution.
Wait, are you saying that’s not socially acceptable to do to someone’s kid? Shit, now I see where I fucked up…
On a more serious note, while I do want to be a parent through adoption someday, I have some fairly negative feelings toward human reproduction. Not in a moral sense, but in that it squicks me the fuck out. But you know what I do around people who want to/are trying to/already have kids that way? I keep it to my damn self.
i hear the adoption process is a nightmare but some unhappy parents just want others to suffer with them 😛
if anything some ppl shouldn’t have kids/prolly need to go through more testing/training but that’s a slippery slope into corruption
I’d think we’d benefit from a more communal approach to childrearing, personally. If you have one or two people who don’t really know how to raise a child, but they are tasked with being the main person/people raising a child… well, some manage to figure it out, but for a lot it’s what you might expect. If there was more support, there’d be more people for the parents to learn from, more people to help out the parents, and more people to intervene if something is seriously wrong.
Sure, but then people wouldn’t feel so isolated and helpless all the time, and therefore wouldn’t be as easy to indoctrinate into accepting lives of pointless toil and drudgery for the benefit of heartless capitalists.
This is so awwww I am now a diabetic.
And I love it!
Yaaaay becky being a good friend, you love to see it
Be more like Becky? *flippant* Hey alt, why would it matter that “lesbian” modifies “love” and not “sleuth”?
Who’s up for some Rice Purity Test?
this might be my own interpretation, but I think Joyce is still holding on to the idea that virginity is the physical hymen and you lose your virginity by breaking it. Therefore lesbian sex “doesn’t count” as far as the church is concerned, so Becky can still “go back” if she wants to, but Joyce, being straight and likely having PiV sex, would be tainted forever
No, I don’t think so. I really think she knows lesbian sex is just as valid as hetero sex. I read it as Joyce’s struggle is she’s horny, finds Joe super hot, likes him increasingly as a person and has a crush on him, and wants to bone him. Dina and Becky having sex is different to her because they are in love, and Joyce thinks they were meant to be together. Basically, she’s gotten over her hangup about premarital sex, I think, but not sex in a less-than-committed relationship. And I read Becky’s advice as her reassuring Joyce that any sex doesn’t change who a person is or their value, so Joyce doesn’t have to fear that. It’s much better advice than Dorothy’s misplaced momming and accidental reinforcement of the concept of purity by saying Joyce should “not do something she’ll regret.” Yay for Becky helping destigmatize sex!
I love the way you explained this and agree 100%. Joyce opposes Dina and Becky being in love with her being “a gross weirdo” – she’s ashamed of having the hornies for someone with whom she’s not in a committed, loving, long term relationship not too dissimilar to marriage.
And as someone who still struggles with this several years after leaving a sex-shaming cult, I relate to her a lot and I love that Becky is here to help in a healthy way.
So obviously the answer is to get into a committed relationship with Joe and then have sex. Which it seems like Joe is down for.
Yay Becky!
I did not know how much I needed this until I read this. Thank you. I really missed these two just being good to each other.
Awwwww, Becky is so sweet. She’s helping Joyce and she’s getting rid of the doubts and fears she had left. It’s nice to see her become so wise.
Wise? maybe. Wiser. Surely. 🙂
Cue Joyce waking up in her childhood bed with her wall calendar open to August.
Becky at her best.
I don’t think we’ve seen Joyce without glasses in a hot minute.
@hovertext, can you just imagine, a hallway that’s vaguely depicted as both short and long, filled with doors with almost nothing to distinguish themselves except alternating red and blue framed whiteboards?
Becky may not be pure. But she sure is wholesome as fuck right now.
Wow, I’m so surprised that Becky doesn’t care that Sarah told the “secret” she and her girlfriend WERE YELLING ABOUT
it’s almost like the commenters on this site are moralist busybodies or something
It’s so utterly fucking shocking, Isn’t it? In fact, I’m so shocked, I’m gonna make a pony OC to cope with how shocked I am.
Be sure to share it with us! 🙃
Purity is bullshit anyway. Good on y’all.
It’s funny, you can really see the soft-sciences influence here. In metallurgy, “Purity is weakness’. Pure iron is both soft and brittle, it’s useless for pretty much everything. the strength comes form alloying elements and impurities like carbon. You know what you get if you breed an animal for purity? iNbreeding, emphasizing all the weakening traits. (pit a purebred versus a mutt, the purebred may have one or two positive traits, the mutt’s better equipped for survival and health).
“Pure” ideas fail CONSTANTLY throughout history,as fanatics tend to result in self-destruction if they aren’t taken down by non-fanatical general populations (both directly and indirectly).
Purity is NOT Strength, it is a WEAKNESS.
huh. these are all things I’ve known, but the way you’ve written this out here is really helping some things click in my head. Thank you!
Fiiiiinally, Joyce and Becky talking to each other honestly again! <3
“You keep using that word.” — Inigo Montoya
OK, Joyce, what do you mean by “pure” and what does that actually have to do with purity? What is it that is supposed to be unmixed? Why do you think Becky has it and you dont?
These concepts are more packed-up than the littlest matryoshka doll. Take it to Gender Studies and give Leslie something to work with.
I mostly lurk in the comments on here, but I wanted to make a comment for this strip. That last line from Becky is seriously changing my outlook on sex and sexuality. It feels like something has finally clicked. It’s hard not to feel shame especially when you’re a lesbian who grew up Christian like myself, but hopefully this will help me begin to heal. Thank you.