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 -
You've got this backwards. The upside risk is infinite, and the downside risk isn't. Jeff Bezos and Bill Gates are still billionaires, btw.
The current advice is insufficient only in that it is not clear enough to men that they need to stop whining.
None of the men who have ever done anything of note ever at any point in human history have done so by meeting something that was fair. Your effort and the effort of the women you want to date will not be equal. It will not balance out. If anything, the shortcoming of the advice you have heard is that you would ever expect that.
Man was not owed the wilderness, and men are not owed women.
Men by and large stopped caring about the wilderness, and new (more rewarding) frontiers opened over that time.
Then men do not owe women anything, including consideration or respect. Hence the efforts to impose that by force paid for by social credit.
I mean they do owe them consideration and respect qua persons.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Good comment, I agree entirely.
Men conquered the women, conquered the wilderness, and they should go about reconquering the women.
One day, this past 150 year interlude can be looked back on as the sexual post-apocalypse, before men as a whole reconquered and subjugated the world again.
Great post.
More options
Context Copy link
Yep.
You can either be rich enough to just absorb the hit, or so destitute you have nothing to lose.
For guys in the middle (i.e. WHERE MOST GUYS ARE), its just financial devastation.
Women aren't owed men's attention and support, by the same token.
And if men are making the logical decision that the prize they get for supporting and paying attention to women is not appealing, why SHOULDN'T they just ignore them?
What's the point of taming wilderness if you aren't then allowed to build a society in it?
What's the point of taming the ocean if you can't go fishing in it.
Why explore the universe if you are not given the credit for your efforts and risks?
You're basically characterizing women as a ENEMY, or possibly just a natural force that men must overcome.
In other words, as a force against ongoing maintenance of civilization.
Makes little sense to give such a dangerous presence much control of your civilization.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link