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 have to ask, what's the problem here? To society, a problem is only a problem if it's a problem for women. Women still get their stud guys who will fuck them, and their nice guys who will marry them - not every man in the world will become neutered at all ages, there will still be outliers. No one cares enough about men, especially not... INCELS <gasp!> to want to change this situation in any way. There's far more than enough men around to ensure the human population keeps going and even if we have a bit of an Idiocracy effect, I'm sure it's mostly self correcting.
The left-liberal consensus is schizophrenic about pornography on a number of axes. Women producing it is good / empowering / entrepreneurial… but men consuming it is icky / pathetic / sexist, and you best not point out the logical contradiction in lauding suppliers while condemning consumers.
Scott wrote an article once about good personal evopsych behaviours in the ancestral environment (e.g. I shouldn’t marry a non-virgin woman because I’ll get STDs and questionable paternity) become enshrined as global cultural mores once civilization develops (e.g. all female purity is morally virtuous, even in women I have no intention of marrying, yay chivalry). My suspicion is that the low status of pornography consumption stems from a similar trajectory: (A) women don’t want their own mate-providers to abandon them for a younger prettier more fertile upstart, and this mutates over millenia into (B) a cultural more that coveting thy neighbours’ wife is morally wrong, and further into (C) that (any) male’s lust for anyone but their long term partner is evil, even if the man is an incel she personally would never touch, who doesn’t have a partner, and is lusting over a CGI woman who doesn't even exist.
The general heuristic is a lossy telephone-game from the actual evopsych concern, but false positives are better than false negatives from the XX POV.
Definitely, and sadly, true. And really, it's so much more ridiculous than even that. Women producing it is good and empowering in theory, or maybe sometimes it is, but most of the time she is doing it because the patriarchy is making her do it, maybe because she has no power and thus has to sell her flesh, or maybe just because of internalized misogyny. The determining factor seems to be vibes and aesthetics more than anything coherent: an OnlyFans model with a carefully curated brand charging $30/month for "spicy content" is an entrepreneur and girlboss. A woman doing similar content for a traditional porn studio is a victim of exploitation. She needs rent money and thus is being coerced by capitalism to go to the traditional studio. Does she genuinely enjoy it? Well, she's been conditioned by the patriarchy since childhood to derive her self-worth from male attention and validation, so her enjoyment is itself evidence of oppression. The fact that she insists she's making a free choice just proves how thoroughly she's internalized patriarchal values - she can't even see her own exploitation. The theorist knows her real interests better than she does. There's no conceivable evidence that could disprove "patriarchy made her do it" because patriarchy is an invisible, all-pervasive force that operates through internalized beliefs. It's kafkaesque.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
No there aren't. South Koreans will be an endangered species by 2100 if the 100% gynocentric sexual culture continues.
South Korea, Japan, and, yes, Poland have a serious fertility crisis right now. Maybe these women want to be with “chad”,[1] but those women contributing to Poland’s fertility crisis sure seem to complain when men from other countries, i.e. “Passport Bros” come to Poland and get together with them
[1] I have posted on my blog that the notion that 20% of the men are having sex with 80% of the women is not true
Slightly off topic, but I think you may be targeting an incorrect formulation of an incel argument with your second myth (alpha fux, beta bux)
The concept isn't that the women will cheat on the provider, but that they'll eventually settle for a beta provider after spending their 20s sleeping around with alphas, and potentially continue to cheat with the alphas while being married to their beta husband.
You provide as counterargument that few children come from cuckoldry, but that doesn't really address the claim: no one's claiming that the women are having children with the alphas, that would be an insult that even the beta husband could probably not ignore, and would likely lead to the "beta bux" drying up quite quickly (modulo divorce asset division). Instead, the claim is that the women are having large amounts of sex with the alphas before settling on a beta husband, and (more weakly) that they will often continue to cheat with the alphas.
I looked around a bit for a source for the "alpha fux, beta bux" term, and Rationalwiki (who if I recall correctly is fairly anti-incel and thus has no reason to give them an easier-to-defend term) cites Heartiste as the origination of this.
Sexual liberation cannot be half-stepped. Everybody gets to fuck, all together or paired up.
I'm not going to personally defend this perspective. I'm just here to point out that the data-based argument that samiam makes doesn't actually refute the "alpha fux, beta bux" argument as incels normally formulate it.
There are certainly philosophical arguments that can be made, and I'm not even ruling out the idea that there's a data-based argument that does refute "alpha fux, beta bux", it's just not this one.
I am not an incel and disagree with many aspects of their arguments: the best I can muster is a "there but for the grace of God go I".
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
You've got a rather bad typo in that heading.
Fixed.
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