Social purity movement

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The social purity movement was a late nineteenth century social movement that sought to abolish prostitution and other sexual activities that were considered immoral according to Christian morality. Composed primarily of women, the movement was active in English-speaking nations from the late 1860s to about 1910, exerting an important influence on the contemporaneous feminist, eugenics, and birth control movements.[1] The movement helped to shape feminist views on prostitution.

The roots of the social purity movement lay in early nineteenth century moral reform movements, such as radical utopianism, abolitionism, and the temperance movement. In the late 19th century, "social" was a euphemism for "sexual"; the movement first formed in opposition to the legalization and regulation of prostitution, and quickly spread to other sex-related issues such as setting the age of consent, sexually segregating prisons, eliminating abortion, opposing contraception, and censoring pornography.[2]

See also

Notes

  1. ↑ Olasky, Marvin N. (1992). Abortion rites: a social history of abortion in America. Good News Publishers. p. 127. ISBN 0-89107-687-5. 
  2. ↑ (Gordon 2002: 72-73)

Sources

Egan, R.D.; G. Hawkes (2007). "Producing the Prurient through the Pedagogy of Purity: Childhood Sexuality and the Social Purity Movement". Journal of Historical Sociology 20 (4): 443–461. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6443.2007.00319.x. 

Gordon, L. (2002). The Moral Property of Women: A History of Birth Control Politics in America. University of Illinois Press. 

Hall, L. (2004). "Hauling Down the Double Standard: Feminism, Social Purity and Sexual Science in Late Nineteenth-Century Britain". Gender & History 16 (1): 36–56. doi:10.1111/j.0953-5233.2004.325_1.x. 

Kevles, D. J. (1985). In the Name of Eugenics: Genetics and the Uses of Human Heredity. New York: Knopf. 

Morgan, S. (2007). "" Wild oats or acorns?" Social purity, sexual politics and the response of the Late-Victorian Church". Journal of religious history 31 (2): 151–168. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9809.2007.00551.x. 


This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share Alike; additional terms may apply for the media files.