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 -
Ah, Just Worlding rears its ugly head. Apparently no one could actually be economically productive and still suffer from lackanooky.
But not horrified to notice that you are endorsing enslavement, because you refuse to notice.
You're getting increasingly lazy in your argumentation. It's not "Just worlding" to notice the correlation between NEET gooners and incels. Is every single incel a non producer? No, but the flattering cope that by and large they are producers unfairly providing for whores who won't give them nooky doesn't correlate to any honest observation.
As for enslavement, what I notice is that you have reduced the argument to "Failure to enslave and rape women means enslavement of men." I'm not sure that is the position you intended to back into. I'm also not sure it's not. But it's certainly a Kulak-based take. Fascinating.
Let's say you're right and I'm failing to be horrified by enslavement of men because I don't notice it. (I reject your flawed logic, but let's suppose it holds, for the sake of argumen.) Are you claiming that believing women should be enslaved and raped is more moral because you admit noticing that's what you're endorsing?
If not every single incel is a non producer, then this argument applies to at least one incel, and dismissing it with "skepticism" is indeed just-worlding.
Certainly I have not reduced it to that. You can just not enslave the men. In fact, even if you enslave some women you haven't stopped enslaving the men.
Have you seen the meme that goes:
Man: "The average women is 5'4." Woman: "But I'm 5'8" though."
You're doing the meme.
Great, we both agree you shouldn't enslave people. Why did it take you so long to get there?
I don't think you have the data to say that the average incel is a NEET gooner. But even if you did, the average doesn't matter; those incels who are not NEET gooners would still have a valid objection.
Why can't you get there? Or do you think only women are people? The incels have a problem, and some have an awful solution for it. You just want them to suck it up (and actually they don't have a problem anyway because they're just NEET gooners)
I want incels who can't get laid to suck it up (or improve their situation), yes.
Their "awful solution" is that women should be forced to have sex with them or starve. You are arguing that if I reject that awful solution, I am endorsing male slavery. How did you get there?
I am erwgv3g34, and I'm here to ask you a question. Is a producer not entitled to his own mid? "No!" says the PUA, "she belongs to Chad." "No!" says the feminist, "she belongs to herself." "Yes!" says the Churchian, "but only after she hits the wall." I rejected those answers; instead, I chose something different. I chose the impossible. I chose... patriarchy, a system where the beta would not fear divorce, where the incel would not be shut out of the sexual marketplace, where fertility would not crash below replacement! And with the crime of your thought, patriarchy can become your system as well.
Why are you reviving a week-old thread?
Okay, I'll play:
All your answers are straw men, and they begin with the word "entitled."
Children are entitled to be cared for by their parents. Citizens are entitled to certain rights.
Beyond that, nobody is entitled to much of anything. You have to earn what you want in life. That is the human condition. You have to earn food. You have to earn shelter. You have to earn sex.
Nobody is entitled to a wife, a husband, a relationship. Because entitled implies someone else is obligated to give it to you.
Saying you are entitled to a "mid" as you put it implies that somewhere out there is a woman who is obligated to fuck you, and you exclusively. Who is she? How are we to locate her? By what means do you propose this involuntary fuckable be provided to you?
Patriarchy, you say? But even under patriarchy, you'd have to impress some girl's father enough to be willing to give her to you. Even if you want to DreadJimmax and say women are property, you are just transferring the obligation upwards: somewhere out there is a man who's obligated to give you his daughter to fuck.
Also note that under most real-world patriarchies, fathers still tended to have some affection for their daughters and would not give them to a man who truly repulsed her and seemed likely to make her miserable. And those patriarchies that do treat women as literal commodity goods in that fashion are pretty fucking miserable places to live for everyone!
What do you have to offer that would convince any decent father who cares for his daughter's well-being to give her to you?
I was reading over the thread again when I had a burst of inspiration; I thought it would be a shame to let it go to waste, but it wasn't long enough for a top level post. Better to put it out now; I expect I'll have a chance to use it again later.
I believe that there should be a chicken in every pot. That does not mean I want the government to assign each worker a chicken, and set quotas for the raising thereof, and nationalize the means of production to make it happen, because we have run that experiment for 70 years in half the world and every time it ends in disaster. Rather, it means I want the government to create the economic conditions that allow each man to buy his own damn chicken. And that starts with the government just not doing everything in its power to obstruct the commerce of chickens, such as preventing shop owners from lynching shoplifters or setting price ceilings on the true price of chickens.
Likewise, I believe that every worker should have a wife, that does not mean I want a government mandated gf. It means I want the government to create the conditions where every productive man can find his own damn wife. And that starts with the government not doing everything humanly possible to undermine the institution of marriage, such as stealing from working men to provide welfare to single mothers, or rewarding wives who break up the marriage with half of their husband's assets, or locking up the man who murders his woman's lover in a fit of rage. When you find yourself in a hole, stop digging.
("Every man" is a bit of an exaggeration; just as the correct number of collapsed buildings is not zero, because that means you are overbuilding your houses and spending too much money in construction, the correct number of incels is not zero. But, to paraphrase Kevin Dolan, marriage and reproduction should be normal and typical; the supermajority of working men who want a wife should be able to get one while she is still young and virginal, and involuntary bachelorhood should be an unusual tragedy.)
If we ration women to one per men, which is part of the plan, then at some point fathers have to look at their aging daughters and make a decision between picking one of their suitors and spinsterdom. When women are allowed to make the decision themselves, they either oopsie into single motherdom while fucking men who have no intention of committing to them, or, if use birth control religiously and willing abort any accidents, end up as childless catladies. At best, they might snag a beta in their last fertile years and have 1-2 kids. I trust fathers to make a better choice, sooner, and without attendant promiscuity. Not to repulsive man, unless the daughter herself is repulsive, but to an average man. And if the daughter finds him repulsive, it is herself who is being spoiled and unreasonable.
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
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link