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’ve been inwardly giggling at you and @faceh’s recent comments matter-of-factly talking about castrating or even executing “Lothario” men.
Like the state of affairs is so bleak, the cultural inertia too powerful to reverse, that such a practice is more realistic and further within the Overton window than marginally but directly limiting or inconveniencing the FUN or freedom of young women in some way to increase the protections afforded them.
lmao, epic roommate-mogging.
Do you have to listen to her moaning when he’s taking her to poundtown in your apartment? If I had a roommate, I’d be looking into lease-breaking options before subjecting myself to potentially seeing a crush, even a mild one, walk into a roommate’s room—much less listening to her moaning when it’s her turn out of his soft harem to get railed, at which point the recently discussed option of assisted suicide would rise in temptation.
Maybe he could kindly grab a PoV cellphone sex tape with her for you. It might break her spell on you, cure your crush on her, for you to see her Wonderfulness get defiled. On the other hand, it could also skyrocket your seethe and jealousy.
Well, he’s laying pipe left and right, so it sounds like he’s still in decent enough shape. The market speaks. What better judge of shape than what’s deemed sufficient by various young women to dick them down?
That’s disgusting: scrolling on Instagram, watching TV shows, and having sex with various women. How does he meet these women and how does he seduce them? Just so I know how to avoid such a lifestyle.
“What do you call someone who gets his PhD with zero publications?”
“Doctor.”
If he’s not intending to go into academia or pursue one of the rare industry jobs that cares about such a thing, publication grinding is a poor use of time. If he indeed is intending to do so, the only real victim of his lack of publication record would be himself.
If he’s “mooching” off the NIH, to the extent this is an injustice, the fault primarily lies with his PI and/or dissertation committee for letting him coast his way to a PhD. Otherwise, I disagree he has some unilateral duty to Contribute to society based on some nebulous Social Contract, a duty rarely demanded of women or non-Asian minorities.
Expecting him to labcuck and publication grind Just Because instead of chilling out and slinging dick would sound like Calvin’s dad and “misery breeds character” to me.
You should invite James here. Would be entertaining to hear things from the perspective of jdizzler’s rizzler roommate.
ETA:
I was mentally formulating a response to @mrvanillasky's reply along these lines with a tag to @thejdizzler, but given @FCfromSSC's reply this is combined with the follow-up to that too.
I did not intend to insult nor antagonize @thejdizzler with the portion @FCfromSSC quoted, nor any of my original comment. The opposite, actually: I was expressing to @thejdizzler the sense of horror and hilarity I got from the situation like I would have if a close real-life, similarly-aged male friend recounted me such a tale. Perhaps I was in an overly jovial mood from the comments about castrating/executing "Lothario" men,* for the reason described in "like the state of affairs is so bleak..." But then again, one's crush signing up to be on a Lothario roommate's roster of fucktoys—what is this, if not a plotline out of some dark comedy?
I was not trying to "teach a lesson", nor was I (on the other side of the coin) trying to provide @thejdizzler guidance, gentle or otherwise. As at least for the immediate situation at hand, I didn't have anything in mind to be taught or guided beyond the generic "just live solo," which is a common suggestion of mine, especially to young men having anything less than a blast of a time living with (a) roommate(s). Or "just don't have crushes on chicks who are potential soft harem members for other guys," which might not be all-too-actionable advice.
Conditional on having-Lothario-roommate-casually-piping-down-your-crush, @thejdizzler's tolerating the situation with better chillness than I likely would, hence my partially joking comment that such a scenario would make me feel more tempted by assisted suicide on the margin.
* If I wanted to object to such proposals I would have (time/energy permitting), but I didn't—the proposal(s) of castrating/executing "Lotharios" strikes me as mostly amusing and fanciful. The thing I did want to provide a friendly objection for was something more grounded, the notion of a unilateral duty to "contribut[e] to society," and/or an obligation to for some reason having to go above and beyond in completing one's PhD (or any degree, for that matter). This was unrelated to the section @FCfromSSC quoted.
This shit turns people into the Joker.
More options
Context Copy link
This is maybe the funniest comment I've seen in all my years on SSC/CWR/Motte
More options
Context Copy link
Do not use edits to argue with a banning. You may send us modmail if you want to plead your case, but normally post-ban edits like this are grounds for a permaban.
I concur with @FCfromSSC that regardless of how you "intended" it, this post was clearly a direct attack on @thejdizzler, and it did not strike me (nor him, apparently) as good-natured at all.
More options
Context Copy link
Indeed. The wars of the sexes, and the resulting fertility collapse, have gotten so bad that people are willing to resort to literally anything to fix them: killing womanizers, paying women to birth orphans, anything at all...
...except the one thing that we know works, and that kept civilization running for the past 5,000 years. De-emancipate women? Never! Better to go extinct.
Having been around de-emancipated women it isn’t a panacea.
Sand wigger white sharia posting tends to fail to realize that sharia- and deeply oppressive traditional cultures more generally- have a lot of supporting social structures which are much harder to generate de novo.
On the one hand, yes, this. It's why the atheist Confucian Xunzi is rather more conservative than many of his contemporaries — social technologies are a fragile inheritance, the accumulated wisdom and social capital of centuries, and are not easily regained (if they can be regained at all) once lost. I, too, find myself frustrated by people who act as if generating such institutions de novo is trivial or easy.
But on the other hand, the second best time to plant a tree and all that. Sure, working to rebuild all those social structures is, again, a multi-generational project requiring a lot of hard work and sacrifice… but what's the alternative?
Yes, we should plant trees. But can you blame women for not signing up to be de-emancipated in the hopes someone else solves all their problems? Putting the cart before the horse there.
I think what puts us between a horse and a hard place in this situation is that the default that women have chosen - something I certainly can't blame them for - is to be emancipated and then hope that someone else solves all their problems, and this combination of emancipation + hoping for a savior seems to result in poor life satisfaction, arguably even poorer than non being emancipated and then hoping that someone else solves all their problems. Whether this means that de-emancipating and hoping that someone else solves all their problems will have positive impacts is an open question. It's also arguable that being emancipated and using free will and agency to give away control to others and be unsatisfied about it is better in some way than to not be emancipated and while being forced into a life that's more satisfying. What I think most people would consider the golden path or the ideal outcome is women embracing their semi-recent emancipation and the agency and responsibility that goes along with it to solve their own problems, but recent history in sociopolitical movements relating to women's issues shouldn't give us much hope for that happening anytime soon. Hence why there appears to be no good option, just awful and more awful ones.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Women are currently too valuable as a political force for the political class to remove their power to vote, let alone reduce them to chattel.
So that is DEFINITELY a 'coup-complete' sort of solution.
More options
Context Copy link
If it worked, it would still persist. Clearly it does not work now. You go on and on with intellectual historical arguments in favor of de-emancipation, yet those are not enough because there is no more hard physical dependency of women on male physical labor. Inb4 "what if all male power plant workers quit": they won't. The dependency of society on strictly male labor has grown too abstract to leverage or to bellyfeel.
Given that civilization ran in the same ways for 5 thousand years, you should expect whatever broke the cycle to be a pretty fucking good reason to break it. You act like it was just a whim, a momentary lapse of men to free women and if they just Rise Up and Retvrn, the toothpaste can be put back in the tube.
I expect the societies that do not go full Amish to crush the ones that do before the latter can outbreed the former, or in spite of it. As to what happens to them later, maybe they will start killing womanizers or otherwise solve the equation of the sexes infavorably to men. No one said that personal physical strength and long distribution tails is going to be king forever. I do not expect the intellectual desire to not go extinct to be sufficient to revert all existing societies to Amish mode.
Islam is on course to dominate Europe within the next generation or two and Islam's take on the gender culture war is much closer to the Amish than to the descendants of the sexual revolution who are currently being displaced in their ancestoral homelands.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Any app can be a dating app, Instagram included.
Truly a tragedy, flood of nudes in your DMs. Feeling for you brother.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Thank you for your service, keeping me inside the overton window.
More options
Context Copy link
Compare and contrast:
My assessment is that you are intentionally aiming to be as inflammatory as possible to another commenter with the above, perhaps in an attempt to "teach a lesson" to someone you disagree with. Your post appears to me to be well outside the sort of discussion we aim to foster here.
Your record is four warnings and three AAQCs, and no warnings this year and the last two notes being AAQCs. If this were the usual line-toeing, you would get a warning, but as it stands you are getting a three-day ban. Your record shows that you have a fairly good understanding of where the line is, so I am not buying the scenario where the above is anything other than a willful choice. If you decide to make a habit of this sort of comment, you can expect further bans to escalate rapidly.
??? I think it's because Sloot didn't want to be castrated, or be 'erased from the gene pool' for the crime of not living up to his full potential or fucking girls @thejdizzler pines for. Which aside from being petty and mean is quite a hardline policy, let's face it.
If Sloot or anyone else wishes to object to the policy of castrating or killing "Lotharios", they are as free to make their case as those in favor. I think the ludicrous nature of such a policy is sufficiently evident that arguing against it is a waste of my time; others who judge differently are free to discuss as they will. We allow people to make foolish and even insane arguments here, because we are not interested in accepting responsibility for policing which ideas/positions/ideologies are good and which are not.
What we do not allow is commenters using their posts to directly attack each other, or wind each other up. It seems obvious to me that this is what @Sloot did, and doing so is a violation of several rules here.
It's also worth pointing out that the interpretation of the rules that I am applying here is the reason @Sloot has not himself been banned up to this point. He routinely makes comments that could be described as "petty" and "mean", as well as "advocating hardline policies". He usually does so from behind a level of abstraction similar to that employed by @thejdizzler above, which helps a great deal to keep him on the right side of the line.
It sounded to me like you thought sloot's inflammatory tone came out of nowhere. But it was the equivalent of an inflammatory response by a woman to a 'misogynistic' policy someone here might propose.
Sloot talks like this all the time. If he felt particularly threatened or incensed by the castration comment, it did not show.
Nah he's usually pretty friendly, with other men... It's only when you threaten to cut off his goolies while simultaneously confessing lower status that he becomes this aggressive.
I suppose I don't see much difference between waxing poetic about abstract alleged cucks even though some might be listening, and addressing someone in that manner directly.
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
I recognize that it's a pretty hardline policy. I'm throwing it out as a potential solution to the Lothario problem because every other solution other than "bootstraps" I see as equally outlandish in today's political climate.
I really shouldn't have stated that I was interested in the girl at all, or done any introspection and admitted I was slightly jealous of the guy. Like at @faceh has stated before, even trying to discuss this gets you labeled as an incel.
Yes, violent fantasies of what you're going to do to Chad and Stacy is standard incel fare. I don't see it as serious discussion of policy.
If it was, I'd say morally it's an evil policy - you need far more, and more tangible evidence of harm, to harm others. Practically, it would require the incels to win against the chads on the battlefield when they couldn't on the football field.
To be completely fair, lots of societies have policed cads. It’s not some drastic never before tried policy.
More options
Context Copy link
The Incels don't need to win against all Chads or even most Chads. The problem is not Chad, it's Lothario. Look, I've said it a billion times on this thread and others, my problem is not with guys who can lock down hotter girls than me (although I would be lying if I said I wasn't jealous). It's with guys who churn through tens or hundreds of girls by lying about their intentions, making those girls slightly less dateable for a healthy Chad, and with standards that make relatively normal dudes invisible. In this case forced marriage, followed by castration when there's adultery, doesn't actually seem that far outside of the historical wheelhouse as a way to rein these guys in.
Your justifications are all over the place and incoherent. They boil down to resentment. Lotharios don't need to lie to those women to sleep with them (what are they, proposing? In this day and age?). And obviously you don't castrate people for not being maximally productive. Nor for being too hot ('make standard dudes invisible').
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Yup.
Its not so much a complaint that the playing field isn't level or fair, "Wahhhh Mommm they aren't sharing the pussy, make them share!"
Its objecting to playing the game this way at all because its making everything worse for everyone involved. Either crack down on the people who are making it suck so much... or make everyone play a different, friendlier, more fun game.
But both complaints read like you're sexually unsuccessful and crying for someone to give you a boost, to the uninformed observer.
If both men and women are allowed to lie, misrepresent their intentions, back out of their agreements, and undercut each other, in other words, to defect without penalty, this is where the game spirals to. And there is no obvious bottom.
Coordination to improve things is fuckin' hard, but it requires people to admit the problems that exist and to being impacted by them. And we can't even get to THAT step without people dogpiling on the ones who admit weakness.
And when the people most capable of effecting and coordinating change are also one of the few ones who benefit from the status quo (high value, somewhat sociopathic dudes), its even harder to shift. They don't see a need to adjust things.
I also appreciate your posts. Modern "dating" just seems like the mother of all coordination problems. And people have been playing defect for so long that we've forgotten what it's even like for cooperation to be possible. The guys bragging about their success seem like some "fisherman" who's bragging about how he made a bunch of quick cash using dynamite to exterminate an entire lake of fish.
There are some bigger ones, but this one will directly impact all the others over the long enough run.
I'm confident we'll 'figure it out' because the drive to reproduce and the forces of natural selection are not going to give in so easily. Going to suck for many, many people, though. Possibly including me.
But the CRAZY thing is we had the necessary social techs for this problem. There was a system that 'worked' (not optimal, not everyone was happy, but it was a decent equilibrium) and then dismantled most of it, and now we're stuck here because very few left even remember there being a better time.
Me, I only barely remember a time when it wasn't so openly hostile and the new technology (smartphones, social media) promised to improve things. And I feel like I was a naive idiot to think that way. But I also didn't have a good model of how intersex relations really work at scale.
Who is "we" in this context, who are going to figure it out? The human species… sure, this (alone, at least) probably won't result in the total extinction of *H. sapiens. Societies capable (and willing) to maintain post-Industrial Revolution tech levels? I'm not so sure. The West? Even less sure.
I think the subset of the human species that has the necessary skills to achieve interplanetary spaceflight is probably going to figure something out in time.
Whether that will be enough to keep the species as a whole at a post-industrial revolution tech level, though, I dunno.
Your point is scarily plausible, though.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Don't have anything more to add, but just wanted to say that I really appreciate your voice on these topics. You're one of the few posters who actually seems to take suggestions in this sphere seriously, rather than trying to question the psychology or underlying deeper motives of the poster in question. And maybe these are my insecurities talking, but this kind of thing drives me absolutely up the wall. Like yes, I am sure there is a little bit of jealousy involved in my reaction to Lotharios in real life, and my life could be improved by following the PUA handbook a little more, and not caring what women think a little bit more. Yet I fail to see how this reflects on the deeper problems that you and I both are pointing out.
My general policy is to extend maximum charity and assume good faith until proven otherwise.
Funny enough, I use similar principles when dating, and I get burned for it on occasion.
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
Alright man this was a little far.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link