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 -
Trigger warning - this is related to pornographic material
Lily Philips is an onlyfans model who slept with 100 guys in a single day. She is from the UK and does not have the background of a typical pornstar from the looks of it. Popular Youtube video maker Joshua Pieters made a documentary around it with her in it where at one point she just cracks where she gets a hint of what she just did, in trying to sleep with more guys than most friend circles do in a few lifetimes all for the sake of being edgy.
The clip has gained traction and I feel bad about the girl. Some Christian women are asking for her to be forgiven and taken back under gods grace whilst the Tate Brothers asked their followers to go undercover in her gangbang and literally preach the gospel to a cum infested e celeb. Hell this is the first time I have seen either of them show regret for having ran an onlyfans studio.
Lily and her friends have done similar things before but I cannot find any of it since any mention of her name brings up thousands of links about what she did this week. How do you even describe what she did given that she wants to do a 1000 in a day despite breaking down on camera? The cherry on this cake is that she can get married to a fairly normal guy tomorrow because Riley Reid, another adult entertainer did this too.
edit - removed a question about religiosity, since I think it came off in bad faith which is not my intent at all as a religous person
Here's a weird and kind of dumb article about the stunt that I didn't like very much. Every writer has their blind spots, the topics where their ordinary rigour fails them and they fall victim to the motivated reasoning and logical fallacies they're so careful to avoid on other occasions. Scott's are trans stuff, any and all criticisms of EA, any and all criticisms of polyamory, and anything feminist-coded (and he's only fessed up to the latter); Freddie's are trans stuff and HBD. Mary's is porn and the sex industry. If a factual claim casts the porn industry and/or sex industry in a negative light, she'll believe it, regardless of how implausible it is or how incongruent it is with the other factual claims she's endorsed which are critical of the porn or sex industries.
Here she goes on a bit of a ramble, looking for some way that she can make out that Philips is the victim here, suggesting a bunch of hypotheses in which Philips might be the victim (if you squint) without really committing to any of them, consistently putting the word "consent" in scare quotes. Philips fell victim to audience capture against her will! Philips was possessed by the digital egregore! Philips was slutty before she started her OnlyFans - hey, did you know that a lot of women who are slutty are trauma victims?? isn't that interesting??
Weak stuff all round, far from her best work.
I wish to revisit this matter again in a few days. Who's Freddie btw?
This incident did make me sad, my perspective is skewed towards wanting to believe in the goodness of people, especially women despite having been on the Pua redpill side of things.
Philips ultimately isn't a victim, her choosing to have sex for 8 hours straight for attention isn't because of society forcing her to do it. Thanks for the article though, I had no clue who mary was.
Freddie deBoer.
As I said it's not her best work. I wanted to share some of her better articles, but reviewing her Substack it seems she's paywalled some of her articles which were once visible to free subscribers. Annoying.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link