What's been changed
The original Rice Purity Test, written in 1924 and lightly updated since, contains language that quietly assumes heterosexuality. Phrases like "Member of the Preferred Sex" — abbreviated as MPS throughout — treat opposite-sex attraction as the default and don't translate cleanly to anyone whose experiences don't fit that model. This version rewrites those phrasings to use inclusive, gender-neutral language throughout.
Specifically: every reference to "MPS" or "the preferred sex" has been replaced with "partner" or "someone." Questions that reference gendered intimacy have been reframed in neutral terms that apply regardless of orientation. Questions about reproduction have been rewritten so they apply meaningfully to anyone who could have such an experience. The 100-question count and scoring formula are completely unchanged.
Why this needed to exist
For LGBTQ+ takers of the original test, certain questions either don't apply at all or feel awkwardly worded. A question about "first kiss with an MPS" doesn't really translate the same way for someone whose attractions don't fit that frame. The original test isn't hostile to LGBTQ+ takers — it just predates the cultural shift toward inclusive defaults by about a century. Updating the language is a small change that makes the test feel like it was written for everyone.
This version also adds a small number of questions specific to LGBTQ+ life experiences — coming-out moments, first Pride, first queer relationship, and similar — without replacing any of the original 100. Those questions are clearly marked as additions and can be skipped without affecting your final score, which is still calculated on the original 100-item list.
Score interpretation is identical
Since the underlying scoring system is unchanged, your score on this version means the same thing it would mean on the original test. A 72 here is a 72 there. The averages, the demographic patterns, and the score-meaning interpretations all carry over. The only thing that's different is whether the test felt awkward or natural while you were taking it.
Aggregate data on LGBTQ+ takers specifically is limited because the original test wasn't designed to capture orientation as a variable. Anecdotally, LGBTQ+ test-takers report scores spread across the full range with no obvious pattern that distinguishes them from broader populations — which makes sense, since most of the questions cover universal experiences not unique to any orientation.
Why the inclusive version isn't framed as "separate"
The goal isn't to create a parallel test for one community while leaving the original untouched for everyone else. The goal is to show what an inclusive default looks like. If you're a straight, cisgender taker, this version still works for you — the gender-neutral language doesn't lose anything; it just stops assuming things. The tagline isn't "the LGBTQ+ test." It's "the test, written so it doesn't assume."