Also I love how both articles and subhuman Redditors have this banal binary distinctions for s*x and sexuality in their media
Where as unoriginal and predictable as the tides, that zoomers have infinite porn to Jack off to, and that is the reason they don't want even modern sexuality, let alone s*x
And they refuse to acknowledge this modern liberal secular puritanism
I know majority of rdrama is in actuality liberal, despite all your chudposting, so you yanks have your bubbles even here, but IRL when I've talked to normies apolitical peeps who have relationships, even they have noticed the decisive asexuality in the largest Hollywood slop media, compared to just more than a decade ago.
Chuds and chudtubers like Critical Drinker and their ilk had attributed most new Food girlboss protagonists as being asexul, like Rey from Nu Star Wars, since the Ball 🏀 and chain ⛓️ was too sexist for a kween
But have now after 5 years of slop like Rangs of power, Willow, Witcher, every Amazon and Netflix shit show, Wheel of woke, and so on
Have come to realise there is a new modern secular puritanism at work here.
When we talk about sexlessness, we don't talk about the absence of porn on family media, but the sheer gulf of no relationships, millennials truly are the incel generation
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
The Scottish philosopher !sophistry David Hume, in his The History of England, commented on how Calvinist (Puritan) theology wasn't so much a traditional religious doctrine, as it was the world's first systematic political ideology. I can try to pull quotes if you're interested.
I would argue they're not the "new" Puritans they're just the hyper-post-Christian strain of what has always existed in American culture. The Puritans were the most successful movement in Christianity to preach progress as a return to purity over an imagined force of corruption (now social institutions in general rather than just the Roman/English Church) as the essence of the unfolding of history.
Anyway these channels are like a decade behind the discourse, people were talking about this when Obama was still in office.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I hate John Calvin so goddarn much
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I'm downmarseying because this is a
@kaamrev thread and I don't want to provoke him but would like to give you the coins and I suspect you can infer my beliefs.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Now, Jan Matthias, he was the real deal
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I have a bit of a soft spot for the various anabaptists and similarly to the Quakers even if I think they're wrong.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Jan van Leiden stans where u at
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
I'm surprised to see you have largely the same take on why burgres are like that as I do. I think that "neo" is correct, however. Certainly the modern group would reject the idea that modesty is in any way good or desirable if asked directly, whereas Puritans were fixated on the concept. It is a classic
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I disagree with the 'neo' label, indeed: they are the Puritans through and through (literally descended from them physically not just ideologically) just with the natural conclusion of enlightenment thinking and the 60s sexual revolution mixed in. Maybe that would be another fun topic to expound upon sometime.
(
Longpost still in the works, I wanted to tweak it a bit to respond to antisemitism since we do have a few of those around and we're going with a theme of the continuity between the traditions.)
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context