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 -
Do you think that the kind of improvements required to be within the top million young men in America are outside of the average man's control? Because using your definition of a Good Woman, we can easily backwards-prompt-engineer a Good Man, ie a man who is in the top million-or-so. And I think doing so can be illustrative of what people are talking about when they set men on the self-improvement track, right? "Do these things that are in your control and you will be a Good Man worthy of a Good Woman."
Playing with ChatGPT I came up with a set of seven criteria. Sticking only with actions that are more-or-less completely within a man's control, so no height and no race and no penis size. Trying to stay simple, so nothing specific or weird or regional or denominational. Sticking to things that most men can achieve with their own reasonable effort, so nothing luck based like having married parents or having athletic talent.
Here's what I came up with:
-- Under 40: We should give some age flexibility in here, I think "aim to get married before you are 40" is pretty reasonable advice, and more than ten years age-gap gets iffy in general (<10% of married couple have more than a ten year age gap
-- Single: Obvious, but also note that ChatGPT used data for single showing "not married or cohabiting" which is a little different from the colloquial use but probably works well enough.
-- Earning $65k/yr: Under the median salary for a police officer, achievable for a warehouse forklift operator who picks up some overtime or a backhoe or crane operator; or the median for a high school teacher. A level of income that any man can reasonably reach by their mid-30s without having any special blessings of intellect or skill.
-- No felony convictions: Not a criminal, and also likely captures most violent men.
-- Exercise at least once a week: Better than obesity for men IMHO, maybe just a bitter personal opinion because I am classified as overweight by BMI; but once a week is a pretty easy number to hit, go for a walk, play a beer-ball league of any kind, etc.
-- Attend Religious Services at least once a month: Rhymes with chastity, but more applicable to men, a woman with the values of being chaste is more likely to select for a man who is at least mildly religious. Most women in general will find a man who attends some religious service more attractive for an LTR than a man who doesn't. Very easy to do, as well!
-- No drugs other than Marijuana + Not an alcoholic: I'll spot you weed and ordinary beer consumption. Addicts are obviously worse than non-addicts.
That all seems very reasonable and achievable for your average man before marriage.
Now, are those factors actually the ones that the Good Women and Good Men are selecting on? Probably not, largely speaking, since we didn't include a lot of things they definitely do select on.
But that's a separate question from "Are there enough Good Women for all the Good Men?"
Add 'not addicted to porn and gambling' to your 'drugs' line. This probably weeds out a lot of men. Both of these are common, growing problems.
I'm trying to do as little as possible to get to a similar number of men as OP's good women.
Why? Isn’t your goal to make an equivalent list to see how it matches up?
No, my goal is to assemble a list of "advice compatible" traits that a man can cultivate to put himself in similarly rarified air as a Good Man to match up with one of these Good Women. It's actually pretty easy: there aren't a million single men under 40 out there who make decent money, aren't convicted felons, attend church, work out, and aren't addicts.
We don't need to get into gambling or porn. Just follow those criteria and the Good Woman to Good Man ratio shifts from the GW:M ratios to slightly in favor of Good Men pretty quickly.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Yes, that's the problem; you've decided the result in advance and you're trying to find a way to reach it. That way the onus can properly be left on men and no burden at all placed on women. Which is what we've been doing for the better part of a century at least and has led us here.
I have no interest in lecturing "men" here, advice when given is given to an individual man. And that man can quite surely make good decisions to achieve the goals set out in the post, and be among the top million marriageable men in America.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
-- Has not fathered any children with women who were not his wife at the time.
-- Has not had a divorce with a mother of a child of his before that child turned 16.
This seems largely redundant if restricting ourselves to men under 40. At that point you might as well say never divorced with kids at all.
More options
Context Copy link
Probably good picks, but they don't seem to be selected against as hard as I'd think by women, and have a certain degree of fait accompli to them once they happen. I guess the felony one is also irredeemable but the rest are never lost causes. And anyway I wanted to get there in as few moves as possible.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link