Is the Rice Purity Test harmful? The arguments on both sides
The test has been argued over at Rice for decades. Here are the strongest points on both sides, from the people who were there.
The case against
It began as a way to judge women
The 1924 original was given only to women, and the Thresher framed the results as evidence that freshman women were being "demoralized" by college[1]. Critics argue the idea of measuring "purity" never fully shook that origin[2].
It ranked sexuality
The 1988 and 1998 versions placed same-sex items lower, as if less pure, and earlier lists treated bisexuality as the least pure of all[1][3]. A 2024 University of Puget Sound article argues that this bias left a mark on the test that persists[2].
Its law items are not neutral
The same 2024 article argues that items about arrests and police contact fall harder on students of color, because policing does not fall on everyone equally[2].
It creates pressure
Jones College at Rice banned the test from O-Week 2017. Its coordinator said it can leave new students uncomfortable and self-conscious about what they have or have not done, and can fuel impostor syndrome[1]. A 2005 O-Week banned it over sexual harassment concerns[1].
The case for
It can be rewritten, and was
The 2012 editors removed the gender and sexuality bias and made every item a consensual choice, specifically because they knew groups would take an older, worse version otherwise[3].
It opens conversations
The Thresher described the test as an entryway into topics that are often taboo[1]. Lovett's coordinator argued for keeping it but holding it until after the healthy relationships talks, and Will Rice mentioned it in that talk to warn students against treating it as a checklist[1].
Choice, not compulsion
Lauriello's defence was that students are under no obligation to take or share it, that people bring their own values to it, and that some take pride in staying in the 90s[3]. A student who wrote a critical blog post about it still told the Thresher she would not discourage anyone from taking it, "it's just a number"[1].
How this site handles it
- Inclusive wording with no gender in any item, following the 2012 approach.
- No score is presented as better or worse, and every page says the list is not a checklist.
- Answers are never stored or sent, so a score is yours to share or keep.
- A note for under-18s on the test page.
We kept the arrest and police items, because they are part of the test people expect. We think the criticism of them is fair, and it is one more reason a score says nothing about character.
Ready? Take the Rice Purity Test. Your answers never leave your device.
Sources
- Emily Abdow, "Purity Test evolves, spreads beyond Rice", The Rice Thresher, 23 August 2017. Link
- Frannie Edwards-Hughes, "The Impure Truth About the Rice Purity Test", The Trail (University of Puget Sound), 11 April 2024. Link
- Anthony Lauriello, "Release of new purity test long overdue", The Rice Thresher, 17 August 2012. Link