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 agree wholeheartedly, albeit in 2 entirely different countries.
Casual sex is a luxury. And that's been true for the entirety of human history. Short of prostitution, courting a partner/paying the bride price was the only way to get your willie wet for the overwhelming majority of men.
The fact that norms have changed, and a small fraction of men are able to avail of it.. Well, that naturally emboldens everyone else. Yet, a longer relationship (that includes sex) is both easier to achieve for the average man, and often more fulfilling. But everyone dreams of driving a Lambo on a Lada budget, and here 'tis the same.
"
Casualsex is a luxury. And that's been true for the entirety of human history. "Indeed. The issue, however, is that progressive maxims generally proclaim inequality is bad and that luxury should be distributed more equally. Yet women are the supreme luxury for men, and their distribution remains highly unequal despite being obviously more important than wealth for male well-being.
I don't care very much if I have twenty thousand dollars more or less, but I'd exchange a significant chunk of my fortune for success with women, and an even bigger chunk to keep the love of my life that came and went last year. What man wouldn't make that trade? The simple truth is that failing to attract women (or a least a woman) makes the average dude's life much, much worse in a way that doesn't seem to be true for women in the corresponding situation. Between the choice of accepting this gigantic inequality as inevitable and denying it exists, it's no surprise many pick the latter option.
Speaking more broadly, I honestly think a big part of the current malaise of the West is caused by the relationship and sex recession. It's difficult to find cultural meaning when you can't get find a girl or at least get laid every now and again, and civilization decline seems to be what no pussy does to a mf.
The recession in turn is caused by many trends, but chief among them in my book are 1) women gaining ever more status and wealth and being generally hypergamous, 2) women using their voting power to tax men so that the state indirectly provides much of that which individual men used to give them, and 3) dating apps rigging the game to the disadvantage of most men.
This trend, coupled with increased tokophobia due to the internet making it easy to research pregnancy and childbirth, leads straight to a sudden and sharp demographic decline. This then runs the real risk of creating an unbreakable demographic death spiral in the entire West (since less children means downsizing of schools, a bigger burden for the coming generation, et cetera, which in turn makes children both more difficult and less enticing). Climate change might be annoying, but demography is the real threat looming over us. The Shadow of sexlessness has fallen over Middle-Earth, and it is hard to see how it might be vanquished. But it's still too early to give up hope, and maybe there'll come a change for the better soon.
Once again, I add here at the end, the foresight of Kipling makes fools of us all:
"On the first Feminian Sandstones we were promised the Fuller Life
(Which started by loving our neighbour and ended by loving his wife)
Till our women had no more children and the men lost reason and faith,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said: "The Wages of Sin is Death."
And weight
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
I'd have assumed most men throughout history have had access to prostitutes.
The idea that the majority of women of good character and upbringing could have premarital sex with men with the public being aware without devastating repercussions on her future is less than a century old.
Notably, most self-proclaimed incels react quite negatively to the idea that they could get around their anguish by paying someone for a quick fuck. They have a point, since a steady relationship is very different from being a john. Casual sex without money explicitly changing hands is one of the greatest/sincerest forms of validation a man can have, it means that they're so intrinsically desirable that there's no need for any of that.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link