This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Almost no women IRL are like this. I’ve been on hundreds of dates in big liberal cities and I don’t think I ever met someone who meets this description. It’s a type of woman that exists basically only online and perhaps in some weird pockets you’ll never encounter in person anyway.
As for the virginity thing, I dunno, sleep with a virgin to get it out of your system. It’s just not important.
There's plenty of women like that, it's just that the "gynosupremacy" usually turns out to be pretty theoretical, and they're a lot more flexible / reasonable in their personal life.
It would be very helpful if you could quantify this risk, though, because as mentioned the consequences for misreading her are severe.
How heavily must a guy filter?
Don’t filter on it ex ante. Go on the date. If she really holds psychotic sexist views (she probably doesn’t) it’ll be quickly obvious.
Great.
But not my point. I can filter my dates by going on them, even if the ratio of crazy/not crazy is unfavorable.
I'm asking for a quantification of how many women out there are actually likely to pass the filter.
And, to really drive the point home, are there enough of them for most guys who want marriage and kids to have them, or do we have to acknowledge that the pie is too small for them all to get a slice, and thus we're actually in a state of heavy competition for a limited resource?
Like I have been saying, almost all of them. The number of normie women who want marriage and kids with normie men is almost certainly greater than the number of number of normie men looking for the same thing. That there’s a huge number of men-hating women out there categorically uninterested or unfit for marriage is a super weird cope made up in red pill/incel/sigma male Twitter. I know this because unlike these people I touch grass regularly and almost every single woman I interact with is normal and wants a normal relationship. Off the top of my head I can think of >10 single women in the Bay Area who are great and looking hard for their guy.
That a lot of these women are below men’s standards for other reasons (too fat, had sex with too many guys, etc) is a different issue and comes down to facing up to the fact that if you’re a 4/10 guy and want to get married you’ll probably have to marry a 4/10 woman.
Yeah, great post. If you want a hot, relatively chaste, young, smart right-leaning woman, that’s not impossible, but you better be the equivalent of that as a man, namely a successful, attractive, charming, relatively young guy who probably has similar values, which in the case of chastity is likely some kind of religious conservatism. Young Mormon men seem to have no issue marrying chaste(ish) pretty blondes who will vote for Romney and deliver 3-4 children, because that’s their milieu. Too often some chubby suburban secular engineer whose primary hobbies are video games and online political discussion thinks he deserves the same.
Hot young people are in no short supply, and some substantial subsection of that group (assuming nothing truly weird or ambitious) likely meets anyone’s individual extra standards. But you have to make sure you’re part of that group, and you’re where the young people are (NYC, SF, LA, etc) and that you have things to offer that they want, too.
A 35 year old average looking guy of average means probably isn’t going to marry a 23 year old conservative trad virgin. If that’s the blackpill @faceh was talking about then, sure, it’s real. But at that point the unlikelihood of winning the lottery is a blackpill, and so is a peasant girl realizing she’s unlikely to marry the prince. If you’re in your thirties as a man you have to accept you missed the first wave of pairings (and arguably the second) and likely (unless extremely hot or successful) have to make do with women for whom the same is true. That’s no great injustice.
The fact that you think these are equivalent requirements shows how ridiculously lopsided the sexual marketplace is against men. All a woman needs to do is be young and chaste, which is something every girl was at some point and which practically guarantees hotness (to men) by itself, and vote for a party that half the country supports. Meanwhile, a man who has spent decades studying and working to become an engineer is told "whoops, sorry, that's not enough, you also need to have interesting (to women) hobbies, be physically fit, and have a handsome face; I'm sure you will find time and energy to do all while you are working at a ridiculously demanding intellectual job, and also you better get all of that done way before you turn 35 because otherwise the idea of you marrying a 23 year old is just creepy!"
In other words, every aspect of a man's life, from his career to his hobbies to his body, must be optimized for attracting women, and it is no one's fault but his own if he fails.
"Women don't care about your struggles, they wait at the finish line and fuck the winners." -- Richard Cooper, The Unplugged Alpha
There was a time when this would have been ordinary. When fathers would have been jockeying for the chance to marry their daughters off to a man of established means instead of standing by impotently as they spend their fertile years getting pumped and dumped by the prince in the futile hope that he will commit. God willing, that time will come again, when the insanity of feminism and the sexual revolution has been consigned to the trash can of history.
But that just isn’t true. Tons of normal men have girlfriends of the same class, social status and hotness. The average 23 year old woman in a relationship is dating a man her age or perhaps one or two years older. He’s unlikely to be particularly rich or successful; he is probably about as hot as she is. What is unbalanced about that?
Most young women aren’t interested in dating a 35 year old guy at 23. They’re interested in dating a 23-25 year old guy at 23, who likely doesn’t have a great deal of money, and who is probably pretty similar to them on all the usual axes. If you missed the boat because you were a loser at 23 that’s sad, but no moreso than a woman who missed the boat and might now deal with infertility or the greater difficulty of finding a good husband in her thirties. That’s life.
I remain entirely unconvinced that it is hugely difficult for an average young man to find a girlfriend that is looks matched (which in America usually means fat) and of approximately the same social status (we can include relative chastity here) and class. I think the obesity crisis has made most people ugly, such that fat people aren’t attracted to each other, and that many people think they deserve more than they can get.
At 29, most women I know married or are soon to marry the boyfriend they had in their early/mid 20s. The minor improvement in income/wealth from marrying an ugly older dude with means just isn’t worth it for most young women.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link