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 -
For any of you who's familiar with New York Times's Wirecutter, which publishes products reviews and lists hot deals:
As of right now, among deals on toys, subwoofers, and mattresses, there are also two vibrators, both around $100.
As far as I can tell, there are no deals on sex toys for men (I'm ignoring vibrators' cross sex appeal here, or how men may use toys to pleasure their female partners).
I don't expect this observation by itself to generate much new insight, as it seems fairly obvious that culturally, men tend to be viewed as perverted or losers for pleasuring themselves with tools, while for women it's fun and almost virtuous (well, certainly less slutty than finding a casual partner). I can see a Wirecutter staff member publishing a review of her personal experience testing various toys, but cannot fathom a male staff member talking about how this particular lifelike doll had very full lips but that one has perkier breasts, and this third company makes ethnic dolls for your fantasies. If you Google Wirecutter and sex toys, all the articles that come up are exclusively focused on women or gay men (i.e. anal stuff).
So my question is more about a prediction for how culture may evolve along this front. By what year do you think Wirecutter will publish reviews and deals on sex toys targeted at straight men looking for thrusting fun?
The year that I'll pull out of my ass is...2032
Particularly sex toys intended to be penetrated by a man during sex? Probably never.
Vibrators and presentative toys might, de facto, be primarily used solo by women/gay men; but they're also a very common part of partnered sex. Her vibrator enhances my pleasure, enables certain acts that would be impossible otherwise, allows for angles that wouldn't work otherwise, etc. They're not just something women purchase for themselves or cheekily buy for single friends, I've purchased every sex toy my wife's ever owned as gifts, and she'll joke it's a gift for me more than her. When we have a guest, toys get packed up and brought along. They're an essential item, like I have a sawzall even though I could do that by hand with a hacksaw.
It's tough for me to see where the sex doll fits into partnered sex and enhances her pleasure, though maybe that's just lack of imagination, after all a lot of the same impossible angles and combinations things could work in reverse, so maybe some women would feel the same way. I just don't see what I could do with that which I couldn't do with a partner or by myself.
There are toys out there marketed for the purpose, ranging from rings with built-in vibrators to 'extension' sleeves to pumps, some of which are only functional for penetrative sex or intended solely to assist with penetrative sex. The furry fandom variants like Primal Hardwere seem more successful, but in general they've got a pretty mixed reputation: even for gay couples not every bottom is a size queen, and while 'rabbit'-style internal vibration works great for some women it's actively offputting for others. And a lot of guys don't like the feeling for the ones that are good for solo play as well, since front-side vibration is very much a personal taste thing.
Good points. I have experience with none of those things, the closest being I guess a cock ring I never quite figured out how to use. I think the difference is that male toys are either solo (doll or Fleshlight) or partnered (sleeve extender, vibrating ring). Neither is, to my knowledge, dual purpose.
But come to think of it, when we're talking about the equivalent male item, keeping in mind that many women can't really orgasm without a vibe, we have a commercial product that allows men to have more orgasms, it's super common, it's just not mechanical, it's chemical. Viagra and Cialis are widely advertised, sold, acknowledged, joked about pleasantly, used medically and recreationally. And they serve the same net purpose, increasing the number and quality of orgasms.
I question how true this would be in the absence of pervasive vibrators. Just as overuse of masturbation reduces men's sensitivity, it does the same to women. I've known a few women who absolutely can have orgasms without any mechanical assistance, but only if they give up the vibrator for the prior week.
Given that only 50-70% of women achieve orgasm at all, and you seem to agree that the vibe makes it easier, so I think we have to assume that some portion of those women who don't orgasm at all might with a vibe (and presumably haven't been desensitized by vibes), and some portion of those who can with a vibe don't without.
Although I probably overstated it. Communism, for example increased frequency of female orgasm, so it really is possible we're just doing it all wrong.
I agree that on net vibrators cause more orgasms than they prevent. The same is true of porn, however it is far from clear that coomers are better off than chads in spite of having more orgasms. My general thesis is that a non-trivial fraction of women have, thanks to the social acceptability of vibes, become a female analog of coomers. To be clear, the analogue is not exact - women are different than men. Female achievement is not the product of sublimated sexual desire as it is with men. A female coomer will be more functional than a male one.
And I very much have no idea on the net benefit/loss.
I'll also suggest that centering female sexual satisfaction on orgasms is a mistake. One personal experience: went on vacation with someone and due to a luggage snafu she didn't have her vibrator. After about a week she told me sex was better without it in spite of orgasming only a fraction of the time, and she certainly wanted it more. Some years later I ran into her again and she related that the experience prompted her to give up vibrators when in a relationship. Almost a female version of the coomer gives up porn and finds a girlfriend story.
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