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 -
I'll caveat right away that these numbers are coming from Grok (and Grok is pulling from academic sources that are worse than just an LLM); I don't trust them, you shouldn't trust them, yada yada. two links, because I derped on setting up the first (yes, I shouldn't have asked about the felony one first; everything else got obsessed with race.).
"Thus, 35-45% of 52-68% yields an estimate of 18-31% of American men aged 19-30 having both an income above $50,000 and stable employment."
"To estimate the percentage of American men aged 19-30 who are both emotionally stable and have no history of interpersonal or domestic violence:[...] Assuming independence (a simplification, as mental health issues like PTSD or substance abuse can correlate with IPV perpetration), we multiply the probabilities: 0.80 × 0.70 to 0.85 × 0.75 = 56-64%. If we account for correlation (e.g., mental distress increasing IPV likelihood), the range might be slightly lower, around 50-60%."
"Thus, an estimated 16.4 to 18.2 million American men aged 19–30 are not obese [ed: 60%], based on recent data."
"Approximately 80–89% of American men aged 19–30 would not cheat in a relationship given the opportunity, based on reported infidelity rates and adjusted for hypothetical temptation." [ed: I told you I don't trust the LLM]
"Approximately 40–60% of American men aged 19–30 are fiscally responsible, defined as regularly saving, budgeting, and managing debt without significant financial strain. This range accounts for the variability in financial independence and literacy among young adults."
"Approximately 65–75% of American men aged 19–30 have not fathered a child."
"Approximately 65–75% of American men aged 19–30 have not had more than five previous real-life sexual partners, based on CDC data, General Social Survey findings, and recent trends in sexual inactivity"
One that pidgeon didn't cover, but I think you are motioning around:
Add them together, and Grok says:
[caveat: it did so with the formula "0.65 × 0.30 × 0.80 × 0.60 × 0.80 × 0.40 × 0.65 × 0.65 ≈ 0.0092". Don't trust LLMs!]
And this doesn't include stuff like orientation (despite what you'd think from the yaoi fans, there's a lot of distrust of actual bi guys among women) or student debt or willingness-to-have-kids or whether they're already married. It still leaves a gender gap, but given that the 'seekers' approach was comparing two decades of men against one decade of women, that's not really surprising.
I think that's bad in a different sense; having the vast majority of both gender 'not count' suggests that we're measuring the wrong thing.
((And I think this sort of button-pushing is itself dangerous, in the sense that it's letting both of us do harder statistical analysis without the gut-level integration of the knowledge that adding multiple filters after each other breaks apart comparisons.))
More options
Context Copy link