“You Are Not the Victim Here”: Conspirituality and the Framing of Evangelical Patriarchy as a Victim of #ChurchToo Disruption
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The term “Church Too” not only echoes “#MeToo” but implies a rebuttal against American evangelicalism’s authoritative and longstanding argument of the church existing as a safe and divinized place and the churchgoer positioned within a secure environment – unable to be a part of a sexual assault experience. In other words, abuse happens in “Church Too.” In this piece, we argue that churches’ rhetorical responses to the #ChurchToo movement should be understood as part of evangelicalism’s ongoing perception of being under attack from feminism. They are, therefore, victims in the culture war, in which “ChurchToo” becomes yet another battle to be fought, with the church taking defense. Consequently, evangelicalism’s defense narratives use strategies of conspirituality, narratives of disruption, and the victimhood enthymeme. As a result, we argue scholars must consider these rhetorical strategies to understand how the ideology of victimhood is both deeply embedded and an exceedingly powerful vision of reality, within white American evangelicalism.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.021 | 0.058 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".