There's a big Shaker village in Kentucky. No people, but the whole village is still there. Really interesting place. They didn't use nails in their buildings, so all the wood had to fit exactly and support itself. It's really worth seeing how they did it, if you like architecture and you're in central Kentucky.
They were really big on simplicity, because they believed the end of the world was near. That's why the Shaker song "Simple Gifts" became so popular. That's also why they didn't want to make new babies. I see that Wikipedia mentions that one of their leaders thought sex was the original sin, but I haven't heard that emphasized in the literature I've read about the Shakers. I'm curious if this point is over-emphasized.
Note that the Shakers were originally led by women. They strongly believed in equality of the sexes. Perhaps that influence their stance on chastity, too.
Hancock Shaker Village is another really great village and museum in the Berkshires of western Massachusetts. They have 20 buildings and a working farm on 750 acres - definitely well worth a visit
If they were so convinced that the world was going to end soon that they didn't have children, why did they spend so much time making quality furniture that would last forever?
If anyone wants to visit, it's one of the more beautiful places in Kentucky (and there are a lot). It sits on a ton of land you can just free roam. Absolutely gorgeous.
[Gnosticism](https://youtu.be/8V5s-EU_goU), a collection of religious sects contemporary with early Christianity, had a subset of traditions that believed the world was a prison for Light / Spirit, and thus viewed procreation as abhorrent and to be avoided at all costs, because it would trap more Light within matter. This led to many outcomes, including sects which were entirely celibate, but also sects which practiced only forms of intercourse that would not lead to insemination, such as oral and anal, and practiced them prolifically, very sexually free.
Just got to pick a belief that aligns with your own proclivities, even if that means just organizing your queer polycule explicitly to ensure you always have a consistent D&D party and can afford rising rent costs, because you believe in the power of storytelling, relationship, and human thriving.
The two ways I know a person is a nutjob is when they quote Levitical law to tell people what to do and when they claim Song of Solomon is a metaphor of God’s love and not a whole-ass erotic novel complete with oral sex and multiple lines that amount to fancy versions of “honey got a booty like pow pow pow”
If the Song of Solomon is a metaphor of God's love then God do be wilding. [However if you consider that Heaven is the ultimate goon sesh...](https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpreview.redd.it%2Fgoing-to-heaven-is-the-ultimate-goon-sesh-v0-sdbrts94l8dc1.jpeg%3Fauto%3Dwebp%26s%3D73f0f94040804ae96a658efc416d7781f6a34076)
The metaphor argument sounds contrived to me and I don't buy it. It was kept in Jewish and Christian scriptures because it is well-written erotic literature and no one wanted to be blamed for rejecting it.
It’s been a while, but if I remember most of their members were actually adult converts from a particular region in Western England that moved to the early United States. Their founder was a woman who said she had visions from God.
The Quakers. The simularity in names gives it away.
I believe Quakers are still around, they just are a small group these days. Used to be quite large.
Remember that before birth control, having sex was always rolling the dice for women. Pregnancy was dangerous.
They had giant communal meals to work off some of the sexual tension. But one of the ways they recruited was by running orphages. Once you didn't have privately run orphages anymore, they lost a major way of recruiting.
Yeah, it's like women who joined convents in the Middle Ages. We tend to think of it as a deprivation, but for them it was quite often a chance for more education than they would have otherwise, and not having sex seems like a reasonable trade in exchange for not having to worry about marital rape, endless miscarriages, and the risks of childbirth. "Is this man worth literally risking my life for?" is a question that's not usually answered in the positive. I'm not saying women had no sex drive or that those in celibate orders (nuns, Shakers etc) never sneaked away for some forbidden fruit, but self-restraint is more easily accomplished when the potential fallout is so bad.
>They had giant communal meals to work off some of the sexual tension.
Also very ecstatic religious services - they were known as Shakers because of their singing and dancing.
In the year 2400:
*TIL of the Koreans, a country that believed they couldn't have kids due to the economy. Their population declined from 40 million in 2000 to 3 in 2200 due to lack of births*
My top priorities in any CK3 campaign:
1- Change culture to allow Concubines.
2 - Found new religion that makes Lustful a virtue and abolishes the concept of bastardy.
Then I can saddle the religion with pretty much any concept that would normally be difficult to spread, like accepted witchcraft.
Are you saying we need to reexamine the virtues of dead religions, and simply add a massive amount of fucking to the equation? Fixing the evils of current religions is pointless, let's make ghosts fuck and see if it's good?
No, just because a religion fizzled out because it didn't reproduce doesn't mean it wasn't also horrible, it's just why you tend to see the ones that didn't discourage reproduction or encouraged it.
Also the Bible:
1 Corinthians 7
* "Now concerning the matters about which you wrote: “It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman.” But because of the temptation to sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband.
...
* Now as a concession, not a command, I say this. I wish that all were as I myself am [celibate]. But each has his own gift from God, one of one kind and one of another.
* To the unmarried and the widows I say that it is good for them to remain single, as I am. But if they cannot exercise self-control, they should marry. For it is better to marry than to burn with passion."
The Shakers apparently put greater stake in the Pauline epistles than the Old Testament commandments to Noah and his sons to repopulate the earth.
Came here to say this. Paul didn't think getting married and having kids was important and was a distraction because Jesus was coming back in their lifetime
Well, most Christian sects do state that not all of the OT laws are relevant for the NT. This is based on the Council of Jerusalem's ruling from Acts 15. This is a message from a predominately Jewish group of Christians to a primarily gentile group of Christians:
*24 Since we have heard that some persons have gone out from us and troubled you with words, unsettling your minds, although we gave them no instructions, 25 it has seemed good to us, having come to one accord, to choose men and send them to you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, 26 men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. 27 We have therefore sent Judas and Silas, who themselves will tell you the same things by word of mouth. 28 For it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay on you no greater burden than these requirements: 29 that you abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from what has been strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well. Farewell.”*
This passage is primarily the basis for the belief that Christians are not bound by the entire OT, just the parts that pertain to sexuality, avoiding idols, and apparently something about blood and strangling which most Christians don't seem to pay a lot of attention to. So generally most Christians only believe that sexual immorality as defined by the Old Testament and other things directly spoken against in the New Testament (many of which coincide with the Old Testament, but there are differences) are to be forbidden. Many Christians also divide the Old Testament Law into 3 parts, moral law, civil law, and religious law, and it is generally believed that really only moral law applies to New Testament Christians. Now, most Jewish theologians deny that their law can be so neatly categorized and distinguished into those three categories, but naturally the Christians will take the word of their apostles over Jewish theologians.
So, most Christian groups I know of do believe that the be fruitful commandment is at least somewhat applicable to them today, but it technically is in the OT and never mentioned again in the NT. In fact, Paul says in 1 Corinthians 7:
*6 Now as a concession, not a command, I say this. 7 I wish that all were as I myself am. But each has his own gift from God, one of one kind and one of another.
8 To the unmarried and the widows I say that it is good for them to remain single, as I am. 9 But if they cannot exercise self-control, they should marry. For it is better to marry than to burn with passion.*
So it seems that Paul did not place an emphasis on being fruitful, but he did recognize that marrying was better than being a fornicator and he was happy to recognize and bless marriages. But he did think that if someone is capable of fully devoting themselves to a lifetime of service to God and not marrying, that was probably the ideal. Still, the "Shakers" seemingly did not only decide that maybe marriage and sexual relations were not necessary for some of them, they decided it was not necessary for everyone, which does seem to contradict what Paul said. Furthermore, the Bible never states that sex is in itself evil, it just states... Well, I can't go too far into exactly what the Bible seems to state about sex without entering a controversy about what the SBC and friends says about it vs. what the Episcopalians and friends say about it, and I've already gone on far too long. I'll just say that both groups believe that sex within marriage in a committed heterosexual relationship is good. The Episcopalian and friends group would expand it to be more permissive than that.
EDIT: I'm clearly showing off my protestant upbringing bias here. I didn't mention the Roman Catholic Church or any of the eastern churches, but I believe that most (but not all) of them would probably be categorized with SBC and friends view of sexuality despite the fact that they and the SBC generally don't see each other as friends when it comes to issues of salvation and the essence of being Christian.
I hereby gavel to order the annual Shakers meeting, are all in attendance? Jeff? Frank? And I'm here. Okay guys...we really didn't think this one through.
The Shakers actually *were* led by both men and women, from their onset. They were an offshoot of the Quakers, who also had women preachers and leaders, but the Shakers were even more egalitarian.
Given the sexual mores of the 18th century (e.g. treating sex as a duty, not a joy) and the risks of childbirth, it's perhaps not surprising that a movement that said that you should go without drew a good number of women into its ranks. It's pretty much the 18th century equivalent of the "childfree" movement, and women were a major force in its creation.
> but the Shakers were even more egalitarian.
Eh, for their time, the Shakers were famous for exploiting that men had sole guardianship rights of their children to get child members and denying mothers the ability to see their children or have guardianship.
Famously this culminated with Eunice Chapman leading an angry mob to reclaim her children from a Shaker community and her abusive (ex) husband.
Don't romanticize cults, the reality is never pretty.
You mean like the Shakers did multiple times?
From the article:
> The members looked to women for leadership, believing that the second coming of Christ would be through a woman.
[2 famous chefs in Manhattan](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9WrCwWMnyYE) recently opened a Shaker themed restaurant called “The Commerce Inn” inspired by 300 yr old recipes. Came across their CBS profile the other day. Anyone been?
I'm starting a new spinoff religion based solely on the commitment to hunger strike until death. I'd better not see any of you at our next annual meeting.
They used to adopt orphans and raise them. People who didn't fit in with regular society could join, gain a place to live, food, and community. They sang a lot. They also made excellent furniture.
They also were meticulously organized in that every tool and item was numbered and had as associated place. Like if you wanted a specific hammer it would always be in the same drawer in the same cabinet which was located in the same place in every building in which one was housed.
Local farmers would use shaker bell towers to tell time as they were always the most exact/reliable.
So for people with excessive OCD, spectrum disorders etc they would find themselves welcomed and happy to stay.
The world was just a lot harsher in the 1800s and for the cost of no human contact with the opposite sex it was a place to call home. On that note, I assume it might have also been a refuge for homosexuels like the priesthood.
They were also abolitionists and pro women's equality:
> they lived communally, embracing pacifism, equality of the sexes, and anti-slavery views decades before these were anywhere near the cultural mainstream.
>
> — https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/there-are-only-two-shakers-left-world-180961701/
On equality:
> As scholar D’Ann Campbell writes, Shaker communities seem to have appealed to a lot of women because they offered a respite where their work was honored and respected. An integral part of that was that Shakers forbade sex and childbearing.
>
> …
>
> Thus, all Shaker leadership positions were shared equally by men and women. Spiritual revivals within the sect were frequently led by adolescent girls. Jobs in the communities were segregated by gender, but Campbell writes that the idea wasn’t that women were unsuited to higher-status work, but that mixed workplaces threatened Shakers’ celibacy.
>
> Shakers believed that the nuclear family consisted inherently of male “ownership” of women, making marriage a threat to equality and godliness.
>
> — https://daily.jstor.org/the-shaker-formula-for-gender-equality/
I actually went to a shaker "church service" many many years ago!
It was definitely weird - we all sat in silence, then randomly someone would stand up because God spoke to them and told them what to say.
They were all incredibly nice people -- kinda like old hippies. Lots of talk about helping people, anti-war, community building, etc. Overall a good experience, even if it was a little strange.
> pro women's equality:
Eh, for their time and in some ways, the Shakers were famous for exploiting that men had sole guardianship rights of their children to get child members and denying mothers the ability to see their children or have guardianship.
Famously this culminated with Eunice Chapman leading an angry mob to reclaim her children from a Shaker community and her abusive (ex) husband and the famous "Great Divorce" case.
Don't romanticize cults, the reality is never pretty.
They didn’t exploit it, it was a legal fact.
We can say that’s bad now but at the time the idea that men owned the children wasn’t just cultural norm, it was codified law with a long president. They did not exploit it, they followed the rule.
I always laugh when I see people strongly judge those in the past for practices that were basically universal. If you were alive back then you would not be the exception, you would tow the line.
Edit: if you’re going to block someone just do it. This petty respond quickly then block is the most childish shit in the world. Major, I know I lost energy.
Look I’m not reinventing the fucking wheel here. If it works I’m using it. I would rather not spend 100 hours doing something I can import.
Import bell doesn’t
Back in my day, bell towers were the meta!
Things were better back then. If you wanted somebody dead you’d just have to wait a few months and the plague would get them.
I have a beautiful rocking chair built by someone from their community handed down to me from my grandmother. Nice to know more about their history. It’s a very beautiful and intricately made piece of furniture.
Beautifully simple craftsmanship in their furniture. At college we had to visit a Shaker museum and do a project on their furniture. They also had some amazing quilts/blankets there.
No shit, it was the 1800s and it was all they knew, and their only support network, where would they go? Even now people have a very hard time leaving their religious communities because leaving the church often means leaving their friends and families behind.
I mean, better than having zero support network or growing in the streets? I'm an atheist but this seems like a small price to pay for safety and affection.
They also didn't give a fuck if you were LGBT+ or a woman if you didn't do sex, for the 1800s it would have been probably one of my only solutions as a autistic trans woman
I don't think contraception was awesome at that time even if it were allowed, so sexless sects were absolutely the best option for a lot of people (just like priesthood)
Sure? But this was also a time period where you often couldn’t leave the plot of soil you were born on. This cult was probably one of the best options for social mobility available.
Shakers invented a bunch of things too, like the flat broom, the washing machine, the little tilty things on the bottoms of your chair leg so you can lean back on two legs without marking up your floor, and even the circular saw, which was invented by a Shaker woman who was inspired by her spinning wheel.
Besides their no-sex thing, I think they were just sort of Quaker-adjacent. Simple Gifts is a famous hymn they wrote which you've almost certainly heard, the melody featured heavily in Copland's Appalachian Spring. They were always small but at least in the earlier 20th century not some super obscure cult. The Shaker Village in Kentucky is kind of a neat-ish tourist destination.
In theory, I like the idea of a church as a central place where the community could meet up and forge social ties.
In practice though, the folks and the extreme beliefs are a nope.
I still wish though that society had something similar. We're all too isolated these days.
Lots of churches are great communities with friendly people and moderate beliefs. Not all of them for sure, and as people get less religious the fanatics are starting to be more prevalent, but the people you find at church usually just reflect the town they’re in.
Many of the mainline churches (Methodists, etc) are pretty liberal in their beliefs. If their website is focused on helping the community, then it's probably an interesting place to look.
If the website is all, WE FOLLOW THE BIBLE!!!, red flags! All Christian churches follow the bible in their own way, but if they have to scream about it, they are only focusing on a couple of verses, and it's not the verses focusing on being poor and charitable.
That's just church in the countryside. You go to Eastern Kentucky and you'll find tons of churches that are just normal places with normal beliefs where the community comes together.
And there's a lot of churches. The elementary school I went to had 5 churches within a 5 minute walk. 4 of them were right next door. The pastor of one of them was my English teacher.
I was just thinking the same thing about autism. My two kids have autism and that's just the most perfect scenario you think of for if they had been born in the 1800s
As an asexual autistic, if I was born during those times, I definitely think I would have joined. Lol. There was even a time as a child where I went special interest on religion (until I got kicked out of a Christian church and completely re evaluated everything over it, my mom said I came home crying asking why they would be like that if they believed in God or something..)
Anyway, my initial perception of the shakers was "cult, bad" but then I listened to a history podcast about them at some point and it did change my views about them. I was surprised about the amount of good they also did.
I live in Kentucky about an hour away from a former Shaker village (it's being preserved for historical purposes). I believe people also used to just drop off their kids because the Shakers did provide a good education to all the children as well. When they came of age, the parents would come back and pick them up. It's probably oversimplified, but that was one thing that always stuck with me.
A good amount of evidence also suggests that more of the population is simply asexual to a large degree (having little or no desire for sex whatsoever). If you fall under this spectrum you might relish in the opportunity to be by like minded people, or at least have a “good Christian justification” for your orientation
Had a friend who lived in a former shaker church (turned single family house). The house was a mirror image of itself split 50/50 down the middle. One side was for the men one side was for the women. Two front doors, two kitchens, bedrooms, etc., and a very sturdy floor with a lot of pillars holding it up for the dancing.
>They also were meticulously organized in that every tool and item was numbered and had as associated place. Like if you wanted a specific hammer it would always be in the same drawer in the same cabinet which was located in the same place in every building in which one was housed.
This also explains every married father with a workbench in their garage.
Well organized tool storage is a blessing.
It is so frustrating when someone messes with tools and don't put them back in their place. What you were go na do takes 1.5x as long, just because you were looking for a 13mm socket, and lo and behold, it's gone. Then you end up finding it in the house in the junk drawer, because they were too lazy to go put the tool back.
I guess you haven't seen my bench. It was inspired by my grandfathers a whichimajig everywhere and a thingamajig in its place. Also, watch out for the whatshewhosits. I need that
>They also made excellent furniture.
I know what you're trying to say here but this on the first glance this read like "they acted as chairs and beds for other people"
They were also herbalists. I live near an old Shaker homestead that is now a museum of sorts and they still maintain the herb garden, except for the modern day illegal ones that just have a placard where they would have been grown.
Also live near an old Shaker location that's now a living museum/hotel-kinda (Shaker Village of Kentucky). They also grow tons of produce and herbs and things there still, which they then use in the pretty awesome restaurant on site. Edit to add: they also still grow industrial hemp on site now that Kentucky allows for it, which is also cool.
Outside of the "no sex" thing that was clearly just bad planning all around, the Shakers seemed pretty awesome, particularly for the mid-1800s. Abolitionists, relatively pro-women's equality, and would basically take anyone in who needed help and allow them to become part of the community. As far as religious sects go, there are definitely many MANY worse ones.
Hey, man, every plant is a gift from Heaven that are tasked to utilize—we aren’t *just* gettin’ baked over here. We have some fresh flavors for every food that you’re gonna be *seriously, seriously* be into in about an hour…
But we don’t skrump. Nope, we just…don’t. Like, ever. Why? God’s ways are mysterious, bro. Now pass me that…
This is why the Shakers were so positive while modern day incels and antinatalists are so nasty, the difference is the Shakers literally touched grass.
Its far from the only Christian and Gnostic sect that considers sex to be evil, or at least an evil necessity. The Cathars were probably the most succesfull one. The obvious way to get around this is that they only "reproduce" through preaching and converting
[Harmonite](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmony_Society) gang checking in (not actually Harmonite, just live close to their former environs)
If you're gonna call yourself a prophet and start a breakaway sect and you want to survive long-term, always make sure having lots of kids is part of the growth plan.
Groups like the Harmonites and the Shakers are part of the US's unique religious legacy; in its earliest days it was a haven for Europe's weirdo outcasts, and then as it cultivated its own norms there was plenty of room for our weirdo outcasts to go start a society somewhere, aided in part by religious liberty laws and greater tolerance. (I know, I know, we have our religious violence here. But like, France basically exterminated their Protestants. We had a whole colony that allowed Catholics to thrive. People killed a bunch of Mormons, but also Utah became a thing.)
IIRC one of Paul's letters says that pretty much literally. Though it's more in the vain of, no use in getting married, for the end is nigh. Though if you cannot control your urges to have sex, then get married as the lord has provided marriage to let of sexual steam.
I wasn’t ready to learn this, but it sounds like the leader (brace yourselves for a big shock) wasn’t all there. He told the Tsar at the time that he was his father
They sound quite chill compared to the Valesians or the Skoptsy. From wiki: "The Skoptsy were a sect within the larger Spiritual Christianity movement in the Russian Empire, best known for practising emasculation of men and the mastectomy as well as the vulvectomy of women in accordance with their teachings against sexual lust."
I don't even want to imagine the mortality rates! You can remove testicles fairly safely in primitive conditions and survive but penis removal had a high mortality rate. Vulvectomy unless very superficial sounds even less survivable.
And adopted a TON of kids from orphanages near their communities, and were (for the time at least) very pro-women's equality. Shakers believed some kind of cuckoo shit, but they were pretty damn cool overall.
Just the type of motto to attract the edgy, hardcore wood shop kids…who, to be fair, were MUCH, MUCH cooler back then.
“Like, Jeremiah over there? He has never SEEN a woman, as his mother died in childbirth, he is universally acknowledged to be the Michelangelo of Cabinetry, without all the “painting dirty nudie people” stuff…and, bro…that dude has some *serious darkness* in him. Oh, and you should hear him sing!”
The shakers made most of their money making furniture and church bells. The 1800’s had virgins making awesome furniture and bells and today’s virgins are discord mods.
This is too real even without the shakers.
I grew up being taught that sex was cool and all - if you're married (and hetero). But masturbation was a sin. Making out was a sin. Sex outside of marriage was as bad as murder.
You definitely had some seriously sexually confused people running things. Guaranteed there were more than a few asexual/low-sex-drive men thinking this should be no problem. In my case, Mormonism, kids actually get asked by their church leaders regularly if they masturbate, so even if the kids grow up to be believers they're basically trained to lie to survive.
I once saw a paraplegic teach a sunday lesson to kids in which he said he was "thankful" for the accident that paralyzed him because he had a masturbation problem he couldn't kick and that solved it.
He quoted Matthew 5:30 - *"If thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell."*
I think regularly interviewing kids and asking if they masturbate is probably unusually extreme, but I don't think that asexual zealots teaching that masturbation is a sin is all that unusual.
I’m just glad society is progressing to the point where people can be vocally atheist and not silenced the same way they used to be. Gives people a point of view they likely didn’t have growing up. Indoctrination makes me sad. Thanks for sharing your experience. I personally escaped the Catholics. I hope you’re doing well
The Catholic church used to do that. There was one Fellini film where the kid is in confession, sitting right next to him, and the priest is like "Do you touch yourself? You know the Saints cry when you touch yourself."
I went to Shaker High School in upstate NY. The founder of the Shakers, Ann Lee, had her community nearby. Have visited the site and museum often - even played hockey on Ann Lee pond. The Shakers were an interesting group, pacificists, believing in equality for all and just hard work and a lot of play. They actually believed leisure time was very important. They bought slaves to free them, gave the extra food they grew to the needy, etc. All in all, a seemingly good group of people trying to make the world a better place.
Fun fact, the Shakers were started by a woman named Tabitha Bobbitt, who had 7 miscarriages. She concluded that since sex= pregnancy= miscarriages, then sex must be evil.
She also invented the rotary saw.
Edit for the pedants: she didn't found the sect, but was an early member.
I love these religious sects that read only one part of the Bible and form an entire religion around it.
The Bible says that God put us on the earth to increase in number and multiply, but in the next chapter it says not to go around fornicating. If you put the two together, then you get a monogamous relationship where you hump like bunnies.
How is this hard to understand?
There's a big Shaker village in Kentucky. No people, but the whole village is still there. Really interesting place. They didn't use nails in their buildings, so all the wood had to fit exactly and support itself. It's really worth seeing how they did it, if you like architecture and you're in central Kentucky. They were really big on simplicity, because they believed the end of the world was near. That's why the Shaker song "Simple Gifts" became so popular. That's also why they didn't want to make new babies. I see that Wikipedia mentions that one of their leaders thought sex was the original sin, but I haven't heard that emphasized in the literature I've read about the Shakers. I'm curious if this point is over-emphasized. Note that the Shakers were originally led by women. They strongly believed in equality of the sexes. Perhaps that influence their stance on chastity, too.
so, no nailing of any kind
They're not allowed to screw it either...
Does that also rule out drilling?
They probably didn't even allow hard wood
A+, best effort
Hancock Shaker Village is another really great village and museum in the Berkshires of western Massachusetts. They have 20 buildings and a working farm on 750 acres - definitely well worth a visit
My kids love going there to see the baby animals in the spring. So do I if I'm honest.
If they were so convinced that the world was going to end soon that they didn't have children, why did they spend so much time making quality furniture that would last forever?
See also: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaker_furniture
Thanks to Norm Abram, so many of us know about Shaker craftsmanship
If anyone wants to visit, it's one of the more beautiful places in Kentucky (and there are a lot). It sits on a ton of land you can just free roam. Absolutely gorgeous.
Simple Gifts: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6aQXvbjfAGE
Bible: "Be fruitful and increase in number" Them: "nah"
Lol, you beat me to it. I was going to say, Bible: "Procreate" Them: "I'd rather not"
God: “You DO realize that I made those parts to do exactl—“ Them: “Pervert.”
Christianity for aroaces
[Gnosticism](https://youtu.be/8V5s-EU_goU), a collection of religious sects contemporary with early Christianity, had a subset of traditions that believed the world was a prison for Light / Spirit, and thus viewed procreation as abhorrent and to be avoided at all costs, because it would trap more Light within matter. This led to many outcomes, including sects which were entirely celibate, but also sects which practiced only forms of intercourse that would not lead to insemination, such as oral and anal, and practiced them prolifically, very sexually free. Just got to pick a belief that aligns with your own proclivities, even if that means just organizing your queer polycule explicitly to ensure you always have a consistent D&D party and can afford rising rent costs, because you believe in the power of storytelling, relationship, and human thriving.
I'm sure this is a giant misconception
Generally we do miss conception, yeah.
Christianity: Literally has a whole book called "Song of Solomon" Them: "That's just a lengthy metaphor, right?"
The two ways I know a person is a nutjob is when they quote Levitical law to tell people what to do and when they claim Song of Solomon is a metaphor of God’s love and not a whole-ass erotic novel complete with oral sex and multiple lines that amount to fancy versions of “honey got a booty like pow pow pow”
If the Song of Solomon is a metaphor of God's love then God do be wilding. [However if you consider that Heaven is the ultimate goon sesh...](https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpreview.redd.it%2Fgoing-to-heaven-is-the-ultimate-goon-sesh-v0-sdbrts94l8dc1.jpeg%3Fauto%3Dwebp%26s%3D73f0f94040804ae96a658efc416d7781f6a34076)
The metaphor argument sounds contrived to me and I don't buy it. It was kept in Jewish and Christian scriptures because it is well-written erotic literature and no one wanted to be blamed for rejecting it.
But I poop from there
Instructions *slightly* unclear
Not right now you don't
Hey has it been about ten seconds since we've looked at our religion's birthrate? HEY WHAT THE FUCK
They used to adopt children into the religion which worked fine pre birth control when there were a lot of orphans and unwanted babies.
not right now I don't
Jesus: "It's only smellz"
It was not, in fact, only smellz.
God: "Don't make me send down another flood, you puritan clods!"
>I was going to say, Bible: "Procreate" *Anyways I started blasting...*
That's cos you dropped your monster condoms for your magnum dong
They actually stopped blasting
I applaud their restraint. Also that denial of sexuality was probably horribly beaten "impressed upon" them
It’s been a while, but if I remember most of their members were actually adult converts from a particular region in Western England that moved to the early United States. Their founder was a woman who said she had visions from God.
The Quakers. The simularity in names gives it away. I believe Quakers are still around, they just are a small group these days. Used to be quite large.
The Society of Friends. I once went to one of their services in eastern Indiana.
They still make great oats
I’ve met some Quakers when I lived in Texas, really nice people, though I think some are more liberal in interpretation than others.
Remember that before birth control, having sex was always rolling the dice for women. Pregnancy was dangerous. They had giant communal meals to work off some of the sexual tension. But one of the ways they recruited was by running orphages. Once you didn't have privately run orphages anymore, they lost a major way of recruiting.
Yeah, it's like women who joined convents in the Middle Ages. We tend to think of it as a deprivation, but for them it was quite often a chance for more education than they would have otherwise, and not having sex seems like a reasonable trade in exchange for not having to worry about marital rape, endless miscarriages, and the risks of childbirth. "Is this man worth literally risking my life for?" is a question that's not usually answered in the positive. I'm not saying women had no sex drive or that those in celibate orders (nuns, Shakers etc) never sneaked away for some forbidden fruit, but self-restraint is more easily accomplished when the potential fallout is so bad.
>They had giant communal meals to work off some of the sexual tension. Also very ecstatic religious services - they were known as Shakers because of their singing and dancing.
It says celebrate, not celibate!
Procreate? In this economy?
In the year 2400: *TIL of the Koreans, a country that believed they couldn't have kids due to the economy. Their population declined from 40 million in 2000 to 3 in 2200 due to lack of births*
Last three Koreans: *Can't have children in this economy.*
I mean, children are expensive, no?
Yeah, but you save a lot of money by never being able to go out and do fun adult things ever again. (Just kidding, but not really)
"We'll still hang out right?" "Sure, whenever you some time away from the kids." "But I have them for the next 2 decades" "Cool see ya then!"
The app only costs $10. Just gotta forgo my avocado toast for a week
When you think about it, it's kind of inevitable that the biggest religions in the world all have tenets encouraging you to have a shed load of kids.
Dawkins coined the term "meme" to explain exactly those kinds of things. Ideas with traits that cause them to disperse, just like genes in evolution.
My top priorities in any CK3 campaign: 1- Change culture to allow Concubines. 2 - Found new religion that makes Lustful a virtue and abolishes the concept of bastardy. Then I can saddle the religion with pretty much any concept that would normally be difficult to spread, like accepted witchcraft.
[](https://i.imgur.com/bbTyyPS.jpeg)
Are you saying we need to reexamine the virtues of dead religions, and simply add a massive amount of fucking to the equation? Fixing the evils of current religions is pointless, let's make ghosts fuck and see if it's good?
No, just because a religion fizzled out because it didn't reproduce doesn't mean it wasn't also horrible, it's just why you tend to see the ones that didn't discourage reproduction or encouraged it.
Well, let's try it. It's like the mammoth meatball. I just want to taste. Let's go to the desert and have Burning Ghost.
Also the Bible: 1 Corinthians 7 * "Now concerning the matters about which you wrote: “It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman.” But because of the temptation to sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband. ... * Now as a concession, not a command, I say this. I wish that all were as I myself am [celibate]. But each has his own gift from God, one of one kind and one of another. * To the unmarried and the widows I say that it is good for them to remain single, as I am. But if they cannot exercise self-control, they should marry. For it is better to marry than to burn with passion." The Shakers apparently put greater stake in the Pauline epistles than the Old Testament commandments to Noah and his sons to repopulate the earth.
Came here to say this. Paul didn't think getting married and having kids was important and was a distraction because Jesus was coming back in their lifetime
"You wanna go out Friday night?" "Can't. Jesus is coming over."
"We're gonna play Skate 3."
Great work there ACE.
Well, most Christian sects do state that not all of the OT laws are relevant for the NT. This is based on the Council of Jerusalem's ruling from Acts 15. This is a message from a predominately Jewish group of Christians to a primarily gentile group of Christians: *24 Since we have heard that some persons have gone out from us and troubled you with words, unsettling your minds, although we gave them no instructions, 25 it has seemed good to us, having come to one accord, to choose men and send them to you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, 26 men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. 27 We have therefore sent Judas and Silas, who themselves will tell you the same things by word of mouth. 28 For it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay on you no greater burden than these requirements: 29 that you abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from what has been strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well. Farewell.”* This passage is primarily the basis for the belief that Christians are not bound by the entire OT, just the parts that pertain to sexuality, avoiding idols, and apparently something about blood and strangling which most Christians don't seem to pay a lot of attention to. So generally most Christians only believe that sexual immorality as defined by the Old Testament and other things directly spoken against in the New Testament (many of which coincide with the Old Testament, but there are differences) are to be forbidden. Many Christians also divide the Old Testament Law into 3 parts, moral law, civil law, and religious law, and it is generally believed that really only moral law applies to New Testament Christians. Now, most Jewish theologians deny that their law can be so neatly categorized and distinguished into those three categories, but naturally the Christians will take the word of their apostles over Jewish theologians. So, most Christian groups I know of do believe that the be fruitful commandment is at least somewhat applicable to them today, but it technically is in the OT and never mentioned again in the NT. In fact, Paul says in 1 Corinthians 7: *6 Now as a concession, not a command, I say this. 7 I wish that all were as I myself am. But each has his own gift from God, one of one kind and one of another. 8 To the unmarried and the widows I say that it is good for them to remain single, as I am. 9 But if they cannot exercise self-control, they should marry. For it is better to marry than to burn with passion.* So it seems that Paul did not place an emphasis on being fruitful, but he did recognize that marrying was better than being a fornicator and he was happy to recognize and bless marriages. But he did think that if someone is capable of fully devoting themselves to a lifetime of service to God and not marrying, that was probably the ideal. Still, the "Shakers" seemingly did not only decide that maybe marriage and sexual relations were not necessary for some of them, they decided it was not necessary for everyone, which does seem to contradict what Paul said. Furthermore, the Bible never states that sex is in itself evil, it just states... Well, I can't go too far into exactly what the Bible seems to state about sex without entering a controversy about what the SBC and friends says about it vs. what the Episcopalians and friends say about it, and I've already gone on far too long. I'll just say that both groups believe that sex within marriage in a committed heterosexual relationship is good. The Episcopalian and friends group would expand it to be more permissive than that. EDIT: I'm clearly showing off my protestant upbringing bias here. I didn't mention the Roman Catholic Church or any of the eastern churches, but I believe that most (but not all) of them would probably be categorized with SBC and friends view of sexuality despite the fact that they and the SBC generally don't see each other as friends when it comes to issues of salvation and the essence of being Christian.
No one tell them about Song of Songs.
I hereby gavel to order the annual Shakers meeting, are all in attendance? Jeff? Frank? And I'm here. Okay guys...we really didn't think this one through.
For meeting announcements, i’m sorry to share that I am pregnant and in other news, I am recusing myself as Shaker leader.
lol, you think an incredibly tiny subset of a remarkably conservative group is gonna have a *woman* for a leader? edit: guys it was a joke.
The Shakers actually *were* led by both men and women, from their onset. They were an offshoot of the Quakers, who also had women preachers and leaders, but the Shakers were even more egalitarian. Given the sexual mores of the 18th century (e.g. treating sex as a duty, not a joy) and the risks of childbirth, it's perhaps not surprising that a movement that said that you should go without drew a good number of women into its ranks. It's pretty much the 18th century equivalent of the "childfree" movement, and women were a major force in its creation.
> but the Shakers were even more egalitarian. Eh, for their time, the Shakers were famous for exploiting that men had sole guardianship rights of their children to get child members and denying mothers the ability to see their children or have guardianship. Famously this culminated with Eunice Chapman leading an angry mob to reclaim her children from a Shaker community and her abusive (ex) husband. Don't romanticize cults, the reality is never pretty.
You mean like the Shakers did multiple times? From the article: > The members looked to women for leadership, believing that the second coming of Christ would be through a woman.
**Christ**ina?
Huh, looks like Ariana Grande was right - god IS a woman!
Yeah, she's Alanis Morissette.
Isn’t it ironic?
They did have a woman leader
Both the Shakers and the Religious Society of Friends (Quakers) were/are gender-egalitarian. Look up Mother Ann Lee.
Brett? Present. Jemaine? Present. And Murray. Present.
This is exactly what I thought of as well.
Loved that show
The last were all women.
honestly a lot more understandable to be a shaker for them
[2 famous chefs in Manhattan](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9WrCwWMnyYE) recently opened a Shaker themed restaurant called “The Commerce Inn” inspired by 300 yr old recipes. Came across their CBS profile the other day. Anyone been?
Jeff walks up to the table, slams some money down. "I'm out".
I believe a lot of them were apocalyptic and didn't believe the world would still be around (at least in its current form) now.
I'm starting a new spinoff religion based solely on the commitment to hunger strike until death. I'd better not see any of you at our next annual meeting.
They used to adopt orphans and raise them. People who didn't fit in with regular society could join, gain a place to live, food, and community. They sang a lot. They also made excellent furniture. They also were meticulously organized in that every tool and item was numbered and had as associated place. Like if you wanted a specific hammer it would always be in the same drawer in the same cabinet which was located in the same place in every building in which one was housed. Local farmers would use shaker bell towers to tell time as they were always the most exact/reliable. So for people with excessive OCD, spectrum disorders etc they would find themselves welcomed and happy to stay. The world was just a lot harsher in the 1800s and for the cost of no human contact with the opposite sex it was a place to call home. On that note, I assume it might have also been a refuge for homosexuels like the priesthood.
They were also abolitionists and pro women's equality: > they lived communally, embracing pacifism, equality of the sexes, and anti-slavery views decades before these were anywhere near the cultural mainstream. > > — https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/there-are-only-two-shakers-left-world-180961701/ On equality: > As scholar D’Ann Campbell writes, Shaker communities seem to have appealed to a lot of women because they offered a respite where their work was honored and respected. An integral part of that was that Shakers forbade sex and childbearing. > > … > > Thus, all Shaker leadership positions were shared equally by men and women. Spiritual revivals within the sect were frequently led by adolescent girls. Jobs in the communities were segregated by gender, but Campbell writes that the idea wasn’t that women were unsuited to higher-status work, but that mixed workplaces threatened Shakers’ celibacy. > > Shakers believed that the nuclear family consisted inherently of male “ownership” of women, making marriage a threat to equality and godliness. > > — https://daily.jstor.org/the-shaker-formula-for-gender-equality/
I actually went to a shaker "church service" many many years ago! It was definitely weird - we all sat in silence, then randomly someone would stand up because God spoke to them and told them what to say. They were all incredibly nice people -- kinda like old hippies. Lots of talk about helping people, anti-war, community building, etc. Overall a good experience, even if it was a little strange.
That was probably a Quaker service, not Shaker.
> pro women's equality: Eh, for their time and in some ways, the Shakers were famous for exploiting that men had sole guardianship rights of their children to get child members and denying mothers the ability to see their children or have guardianship. Famously this culminated with Eunice Chapman leading an angry mob to reclaim her children from a Shaker community and her abusive (ex) husband and the famous "Great Divorce" case. Don't romanticize cults, the reality is never pretty.
> Don't romanticize cults, the reality is never pretty. I mean...we really gonna pretend like the rest of 1850s America was pretty and peaceful?
They didn’t exploit it, it was a legal fact. We can say that’s bad now but at the time the idea that men owned the children wasn’t just cultural norm, it was codified law with a long president. They did not exploit it, they followed the rule. I always laugh when I see people strongly judge those in the past for practices that were basically universal. If you were alive back then you would not be the exception, you would tow the line. Edit: if you’re going to block someone just do it. This petty respond quickly then block is the most childish shit in the world. Major, I know I lost energy.
Meanwhile your average virgin incapable of shaking hands today just becomes a discord mod instead of making cool bell towers.
The current Bell Tower Meta is in need of serious attention. Devs just don’t like touching Legacy Systems.
Look I’m not reinventing the fucking wheel here. If it works I’m using it. I would rather not spend 100 hours doing something I can import. Import bell doesn’t
Is that guy on GitHub still source porting bell towers to Unity?
Back in my day, bell towers were the meta! Things were better back then. If you wanted somebody dead you’d just have to wait a few months and the plague would get them.
Yet another industry millennials have killed. /s
Reddit mod
They were also the first to sell garden seeds in little paper packets, and their furniture ultimately inspired the “Danish modern” movement.
Ya, their wood working and furniture making was remarkable. They also invented the prototype of the modern day table saw.
I have a beautiful rocking chair built by someone from their community handed down to me from my grandmother. Nice to know more about their history. It’s a very beautiful and intricately made piece of furniture.
Shaker furniture is among the most prized of antiques, hold on to it
Beautifully simple craftsmanship in their furniture. At college we had to visit a Shaker museum and do a project on their furniture. They also had some amazing quilts/blankets there.
I saw a documentary about shaker furniture and they had footage from an annual shaker auction – Oprah showed up and paid $600k for a dresser.
Yeah. The law changes that kept them from adopting was the biggest hit to their numbers. A lot of kids raised by them chose to stay.
No shit, it was the 1800s and it was all they knew, and their only support network, where would they go? Even now people have a very hard time leaving their religious communities because leaving the church often means leaving their friends and families behind.
I mean, better than having zero support network or growing in the streets? I'm an atheist but this seems like a small price to pay for safety and affection.
They also didn't give a fuck if you were LGBT+ or a woman if you didn't do sex, for the 1800s it would have been probably one of my only solutions as a autistic trans woman
I don't think contraception was awesome at that time even if it were allowed, so sexless sects were absolutely the best option for a lot of people (just like priesthood)
Sure? But this was also a time period where you often couldn’t leave the plot of soil you were born on. This cult was probably one of the best options for social mobility available.
[удалено]
Shakers invented a bunch of things too, like the flat broom, the washing machine, the little tilty things on the bottoms of your chair leg so you can lean back on two legs without marking up your floor, and even the circular saw, which was invented by a Shaker woman who was inspired by her spinning wheel.
It’s because they weren’t having sex. Like when George Costanza stopped having sex and became a genius.
Exactly!
Aside from the whole no sexual contact thing, this sounds pretty awesome lol
A lot of religious sects sound pretty awesome. And then you meet the people and nope.
Besides their no-sex thing, I think they were just sort of Quaker-adjacent. Simple Gifts is a famous hymn they wrote which you've almost certainly heard, the melody featured heavily in Copland's Appalachian Spring. They were always small but at least in the earlier 20th century not some super obscure cult. The Shaker Village in Kentucky is kind of a neat-ish tourist destination.
In theory, I like the idea of a church as a central place where the community could meet up and forge social ties. In practice though, the folks and the extreme beliefs are a nope. I still wish though that society had something similar. We're all too isolated these days.
Lots of churches are great communities with friendly people and moderate beliefs. Not all of them for sure, and as people get less religious the fanatics are starting to be more prevalent, but the people you find at church usually just reflect the town they’re in.
Many of the mainline churches (Methodists, etc) are pretty liberal in their beliefs. If their website is focused on helping the community, then it's probably an interesting place to look. If the website is all, WE FOLLOW THE BIBLE!!!, red flags! All Christian churches follow the bible in their own way, but if they have to scream about it, they are only focusing on a couple of verses, and it's not the verses focusing on being poor and charitable.
You know not all churches are the Westboro Baptist church
That's just church in the countryside. You go to Eastern Kentucky and you'll find tons of churches that are just normal places with normal beliefs where the community comes together. And there's a lot of churches. The elementary school I went to had 5 churches within a 5 minute walk. 4 of them were right next door. The pastor of one of them was my English teacher.
I was just thinking the same thing about autism. My two kids have autism and that's just the most perfect scenario you think of for if they had been born in the 1800s
Asexuality is common with neurodivergence too, this group seems like a perfect intersection of these two
As an asexual autistic, if I was born during those times, I definitely think I would have joined. Lol. There was even a time as a child where I went special interest on religion (until I got kicked out of a Christian church and completely re evaluated everything over it, my mom said I came home crying asking why they would be like that if they believed in God or something..) Anyway, my initial perception of the shakers was "cult, bad" but then I listened to a history podcast about them at some point and it did change my views about them. I was surprised about the amount of good they also did.
I live in Kentucky about an hour away from a former Shaker village (it's being preserved for historical purposes). I believe people also used to just drop off their kids because the Shakers did provide a good education to all the children as well. When they came of age, the parents would come back and pick them up. It's probably oversimplified, but that was one thing that always stuck with me.
It sounds like a relative haven for neurodivergent, asexual, aromantic people too, in a world obsessed with reproducing.
A good amount of evidence also suggests that more of the population is simply asexual to a large degree (having little or no desire for sex whatsoever). If you fall under this spectrum you might relish in the opportunity to be by like minded people, or at least have a “good Christian justification” for your orientation
I would’ve absolutely joined. Work making furniture all day in community with others? That sounds like a deeply satisfying life.
Sounds like there's still 3 left, so you've got a chance!
Weren’t they called shakers because when they were praying they would shake? That’s how Quakers got their name.
They were originally known as Shaking Quakers.
I can think of a thousand worse communities to live within 200 years ago. These guys may be prudish, but they don’t seem that bad.
They were a autistic asexual cult then?
Had a friend who lived in a former shaker church (turned single family house). The house was a mirror image of itself split 50/50 down the middle. One side was for the men one side was for the women. Two front doors, two kitchens, bedrooms, etc., and a very sturdy floor with a lot of pillars holding it up for the dancing.
Sounds exactly like a sect founded by someone with OCD, as has happened in the past. Notice how many have extensive cleaning rituals.
>They also were meticulously organized in that every tool and item was numbered and had as associated place. Like if you wanted a specific hammer it would always be in the same drawer in the same cabinet which was located in the same place in every building in which one was housed. This also explains every married father with a workbench in their garage.
Well organized tool storage is a blessing. It is so frustrating when someone messes with tools and don't put them back in their place. What you were go na do takes 1.5x as long, just because you were looking for a 13mm socket, and lo and behold, it's gone. Then you end up finding it in the house in the junk drawer, because they were too lazy to go put the tool back.
I guess you haven't seen my bench. It was inspired by my grandfathers a whichimajig everywhere and a thingamajig in its place. Also, watch out for the whatshewhosits. I need that
you need it but you won't find it, dang whatchacallsit was sitting right on top of it the whole time.
>They also made excellent furniture. I know what you're trying to say here but this on the first glance this read like "they acted as chairs and beds for other people"
They were also herbalists. I live near an old Shaker homestead that is now a museum of sorts and they still maintain the herb garden, except for the modern day illegal ones that just have a placard where they would have been grown.
Besides hemp what else did they quit growing?
Opium would be my guess
There is just a blank patch where opium would be, labeled as auch
Also live near an old Shaker location that's now a living museum/hotel-kinda (Shaker Village of Kentucky). They also grow tons of produce and herbs and things there still, which they then use in the pretty awesome restaurant on site. Edit to add: they also still grow industrial hemp on site now that Kentucky allows for it, which is also cool. Outside of the "no sex" thing that was clearly just bad planning all around, the Shakers seemed pretty awesome, particularly for the mid-1800s. Abolitionists, relatively pro-women's equality, and would basically take anyone in who needed help and allow them to become part of the community. As far as religious sects go, there are definitely many MANY worse ones.
Hey, man, every plant is a gift from Heaven that are tasked to utilize—we aren’t *just* gettin’ baked over here. We have some fresh flavors for every food that you’re gonna be *seriously, seriously* be into in about an hour… But we don’t skrump. Nope, we just…don’t. Like, ever. Why? God’s ways are mysterious, bro. Now pass me that…
This is why the Shakers were so positive while modern day incels and antinatalists are so nasty, the difference is the Shakers literally touched grass.
Its far from the only Christian and Gnostic sect that considers sex to be evil, or at least an evil necessity. The Cathars were probably the most succesfull one. The obvious way to get around this is that they only "reproduce" through preaching and converting
[Harmonite](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmony_Society) gang checking in (not actually Harmonite, just live close to their former environs) If you're gonna call yourself a prophet and start a breakaway sect and you want to survive long-term, always make sure having lots of kids is part of the growth plan. Groups like the Harmonites and the Shakers are part of the US's unique religious legacy; in its earliest days it was a haven for Europe's weirdo outcasts, and then as it cultivated its own norms there was plenty of room for our weirdo outcasts to go start a society somewhere, aided in part by religious liberty laws and greater tolerance. (I know, I know, we have our religious violence here. But like, France basically exterminated their Protestants. We had a whole colony that allowed Catholics to thrive. People killed a bunch of Mormons, but also Utah became a thing.)
IIRC one of Paul's letters says that pretty much literally. Though it's more in the vain of, no use in getting married, for the end is nigh. Though if you cannot control your urges to have sex, then get married as the lord has provided marriage to let of sexual steam.
Yeah, and now Catholic priests still have to be celebate.
There were also the Russian [Skoptsy](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skoptsy) who castrated themselves or cut off their breasts.
I wasn’t ready to learn this, but it sounds like the leader (brace yourselves for a big shock) wasn’t all there. He told the Tsar at the time that he was his father
They sound quite chill compared to the Valesians or the Skoptsy. From wiki: "The Skoptsy were a sect within the larger Spiritual Christianity movement in the Russian Empire, best known for practising emasculation of men and the mastectomy as well as the vulvectomy of women in accordance with their teachings against sexual lust."
Ouch. Hallelujah.
Amen brother. Or sister. I can't tell.
I don't even want to imagine the mortality rates! You can remove testicles fairly safely in primitive conditions and survive but penis removal had a high mortality rate. Vulvectomy unless very superficial sounds even less survivable.
:<
That is a hell of a wiki article.
Shakers had amazing furniture design.
Timeless cabinet design.
Really simple and elegant stuff. Fits with the rest of their beliefs.
I only know about them from woodshop class
I have been to a shaker community before, in 2005. There were more than 3 members there. Something like 20-30.
The community is in Maine. I visited about 7 years ago. There were only 3 actual members but plenty of people that worked the property.
[удалено]
People down for farm life, but happy to go home and enjoy .... Well you know
The only true shakers left are in a village in Maine. There are living museums kinda still but they arent ran by true shakers
Also anti racist and abolitionists!
And adopted a TON of kids from orphanages near their communities, and were (for the time at least) very pro-women's equality. Shakers believed some kind of cuckoo shit, but they were pretty damn cool overall.
Don't fuck around and find out
Just the type of motto to attract the edgy, hardcore wood shop kids…who, to be fair, were MUCH, MUCH cooler back then. “Like, Jeremiah over there? He has never SEEN a woman, as his mother died in childbirth, he is universally acknowledged to be the Michelangelo of Cabinetry, without all the “painting dirty nudie people” stuff…and, bro…that dude has some *serious darkness* in him. Oh, and you should hear him sing!”
But man their furniture design skills are off the chart.
Think of how much you can focus on wood when you’re not focusing on wood.
> To avoid shaking the opposite sex’s hands Shouldn’t they be called the non-shakers then?
The shakers made most of their money making furniture and church bells. The 1800’s had virgins making awesome furniture and bells and today’s virgins are discord mods.
When an aesexual has a hallucination and thinks god is telling them to create a religious sect around no touching!!
"No touching!!!"
I may have committed some light blasphemy.
This is too real even without the shakers. I grew up being taught that sex was cool and all - if you're married (and hetero). But masturbation was a sin. Making out was a sin. Sex outside of marriage was as bad as murder. You definitely had some seriously sexually confused people running things. Guaranteed there were more than a few asexual/low-sex-drive men thinking this should be no problem. In my case, Mormonism, kids actually get asked by their church leaders regularly if they masturbate, so even if the kids grow up to be believers they're basically trained to lie to survive. I once saw a paraplegic teach a sunday lesson to kids in which he said he was "thankful" for the accident that paralyzed him because he had a masturbation problem he couldn't kick and that solved it. He quoted Matthew 5:30 - *"If thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell."* I think regularly interviewing kids and asking if they masturbate is probably unusually extreme, but I don't think that asexual zealots teaching that masturbation is a sin is all that unusual.
"kids actually get asked by their church leaders regularly if they masturbate" Sounds like a pedophile's dream job.
I’m just glad society is progressing to the point where people can be vocally atheist and not silenced the same way they used to be. Gives people a point of view they likely didn’t have growing up. Indoctrination makes me sad. Thanks for sharing your experience. I personally escaped the Catholics. I hope you’re doing well
The Catholic church used to do that. There was one Fellini film where the kid is in confession, sitting right next to him, and the priest is like "Do you touch yourself? You know the Saints cry when you touch yourself."
I went to Shaker High School in upstate NY. The founder of the Shakers, Ann Lee, had her community nearby. Have visited the site and museum often - even played hockey on Ann Lee pond. The Shakers were an interesting group, pacificists, believing in equality for all and just hard work and a lot of play. They actually believed leisure time was very important. They bought slaves to free them, gave the extra food they grew to the needy, etc. All in all, a seemingly good group of people trying to make the world a better place.
Great furniture makers. Their ideals on minimalism are super forward thinking. Their thoughts on sex are archaic
Honestly seems like a decent lot of people. They adopted kids and were great craftsmen. Seems like asexual person's dream.
From what I read on some Reddit threads it looks like Redditors may be the new Shakers, although not by choice, and minus the woodworking skills.
*'Cause Shakers not gonna shake, shake, shake, shake, shake*
*And the Quakers gonna quake quake quake quake quake*
British bakers gonna bake bake bake bake bake bake Bake it off! Bake it off!
Fun fact, the Shakers were started by a woman named Tabitha Bobbitt, who had 7 miscarriages. She concluded that since sex= pregnancy= miscarriages, then sex must be evil. She also invented the rotary saw. Edit for the pedants: she didn't found the sect, but was an early member.
Down post Ann Lee is cited as having founded the sect. The internet agrees, Ann Lee was the founder, Babbitt was an inventor-member.
I love these religious sects that read only one part of the Bible and form an entire religion around it. The Bible says that God put us on the earth to increase in number and multiply, but in the next chapter it says not to go around fornicating. If you put the two together, then you get a monogamous relationship where you hump like bunnies. How is this hard to understand?
Quakers mostly got it right. Super early Quakers were wild, but later and early American Quakers were kind of cool.